Military Review

“Luftwaffe in 45. Recent flights and projects. Continued. Part of 4

391
“Luftwaffe in 45. Recent flights and projects. Continued. Part of 4



This text is a continuation of the abridged translation of the book “Luftwaffe'45. Letzte Fluge und Projekte ”, made by a colleague of NF68, is the author of translations of many interesting topics related to the German air force. The illustrations are taken from the original of the book, the literary processing of the translation from German was made by the author of these lines.

FW-190 with Panzerblitz and Panzerschreck missiles

All attempts to destroy heavy Soviet tanks with the help of heavy guns did not bring success, so from the summer of 1944, the Luftwaffe High Command increasingly began to introduce anti-tank missiles stabilized with wires. For testing all ground and aviation means of fighting tanks, it was decided to use revolutionary weapons. This is especially true of the Panzerblitz and Panzerschreck missiles. The tests were carried out at the 26th test center and at the Luftwaffe test center located in Tarnewitz, and by the end of 1944 the German troops received a really reliable and very powerful weaponable to destroy the heaviest Soviet tanks and self-propelled artillery mounts from the air. These weapons began to arm the first aviation squadrons. Under the wings of the aircraft were installed simple beam-like launchers. The development of this project itself caused the concern of the Luftwaffe High Command. Although 1945 managed to produce a large number of Panzerblitz anti-tank missiles in January, these missiles were not received by combat units. In addition, almost all production in the eastern part of Germany was stopped at that time, and, by order of the head of the Luftwaffe Technical Department, from mid-January 1945, the release of anti-tank missiles had to be transferred to other, less dangerous regions of Germany. By 28 in January, 1945 launched an emergency program for the production of anti-tank missiles, and by this time 2500 Panzerblitz missiles were produced. However, the commander of ground attack aircraft demanded that, in order to effectively counter enemy tanks instead of 40 000 anti-tank missiles, the production volume would be increased to 80 000 missiles a month. Until the end of January, 1945 were made separate parts required for the manufacture of 20 000 missiles.

After the production of anti-tank missiles in Gleiwitz, located in Upper Silesia, was discontinued, their release was planned to be transferred to the Czech city of Brünn, or as soon as possible to the central part of Germany. The head of the Technical Department of the Luftwaffe was convinced that the mass production of anti-tank missiles in the protectorate could be brought to 80 000 missiles per month. In this case, it was necessary to take into account the regions that the Wehrmacht could hold, not allowing the enemy there. It is highly likely that such a new enterprise could be built in the city of Dachau near Munich, where a large number of prisoners of war could be used. At the same time, this concerned test centers, since in the initial stage of the use of anti-tank missiles significant technical flaws of the missiles were identified. The latter should be improved, and at the same time, the production of these missiles should be simplified to acceptable parameters, which should have been done by March 1945. In February, 1945, the German industry had to produce 18 000 anti-tank missiles. In the following months, the release of anti-tank missiles was planned with the expectation of the supply of materials sufficient to produce Panzerblitz missiles for one month 50 000. However, there were problems with the production of other types of weapons and equipment; in addition, these weapons and equipment were difficult to deliver to the front, since Allied air strikes greatly complicated the use of vehicles and communications in the central part of Germany. By the end of February, despite the difficult situation of industry, the German leadership was able to take the next step in the development of weapons. In the first days of April, the head of the Luftwaffe Technical Department briefed Reichsmarschall Goering on his proposal for the production of an improved version of the Panzerblitz 2 controlled anti-tank. In this case, it was about the use of missiles like the R4 with the cumulative warhead of the 8,8 caliber, which could destroy the enemy’s heaviest tanks. 26 March 1945 in the workshops of the company in Böhmen (Böhmen) were prepared to be sent to the front in the total amount of 11 000 anti-tank missiles, but most of them could not be delivered to the troops. The same thing happened with the Panzerblitz 1 and Panzerblitz 2 missiles manufactured in April. From the beginning of 1945, nothing was expected on the Eastern Front, except for the ever-increasing pressure from the Red Army. The front, being held by the German Army Group Center, collapsed after powerful blows from the Red Army. In the northern and southern sectors of the Eastern Front, the overall situation has so far remained threatening. From October 1944, the commander of an assault air squadron SG 3, based in Udetfeld, inspired hope about the prospects for the use of Panzerblitz anti-tank missiles.


Guides for Panzerblitz rockets.

Gradually, other squadrons were arming with this new weapon, where training firing and training on the use of other missiles were organized. After many shooting training pilots achieved up to 30% hits. During practical tests, it turned out that, contrary to the expectations of pilots of combat units, if a missile hit a tank, it could immediately explode if a tower or a hull were hit. To increase the accuracy of firing, rockets were produced from a distance of no more than 100 meters. The 3 / SG 3 group included the 8 Squadron, armed with FW-190 F-8 attack aircraft. The 1 Squadron was based in East Prussia in Gutenfeld (Gutenfeld). Further, training in firing rockets to pilots of a group surrounded in Kurland was conducted on the Baltic Sea coast. From 7 in January 1945, in addition to the 4 squadron. (Pz) / SG 9, another squadron of anti-tank 1 attack aircraft. (Pz) / SG 9, previously designated 9 / SG 9, took part. From now on, the squadron became designated 1. (Pz) / SG 9, while the separate squadron 2. (Pz) / SG 9 began to be designated 10. (Pz) / SG 1. The 10 squadron. (Pz) / SG 1 became known as 3. (Pz) / SG 1. Awarded with oak leaves to the iron cross, captain A. Küffner (Andreas Kuffner) was appointed as the new commander of the 1 / SG 1 group. In early January in Fürstenwald, the group began training, while continuing to strike at the enemy along the line of the Eastern Front. After the 1 squadron received the FW-190 F-8 aircraft capable of carrying Panzerblitz anti-tank missiles, this squadron was transferred to Eggersdorf and then to Freivald Grosenheim (Freiwalde Großeneffen) The 2 th and 3 th squadrons of the group were armed with the Ju-87 G aircraft, which successfully attacked enemy tanks on the Eastern Front. On the morning of January 16, 1945 Squadron 8./SG 3 attacked Russian tanks and other targets from a low altitude. For each Russian tank fired upon, the squadron commander presented the crew with an award in the form of a liter of rum and cigarettes. Although some squadron pilots received this award, the lack of aviation gasoline limited the number of such strikes. 1 February 1945 SG Squadron 1 has not yet received launchers for anti-tank missiles, as planned for timing. However, the aviation group 2 / SG 2, on the contrary, received FW-190 F-8, capable of carrying anti-tank missiles Panzerblitz and Panzerschreck.


In addition to the Panzerblitz, the Panzerschrek missiles were used as lightweight offensive weapons (right under the wing).

In one of the squadrons of the 2 / SG 3 aviation group, some Panzerblitz airplanes with February 1 took part in the battles. The 2 / SG 77 air group, based in Aslau, besides the 20 FW-190 F-8 was armed with 9 airplanes of this type with Panzerblitz missiles, and all in this group there were 19 combat-ready aircraft. The 13 / SG 151 air group from February 1945 was armed with one of the squadrons of FW-190 F-8 planes capable of carrying Panzerblitz missiles. In addition to conventional launchers, wood launchers for anti-tank missiles were also used. In the following weeks, the number of aircraft capable of carrying Panzerblitz missiles increased significantly. The 3 squadron of the SG 9 squadron in February 1945 replaced the Ju-87 G with the FW-190 F, armed with Panzerblitz missiles. This squadron was based in Prenzau. From 4 in February 1945, the general who commanded assault aircraft, planned to transfer part of the SG 151 squadron to the 1 in an aviation fighter division, which was to conduct battles on the Eastern Front. In addition to the remaining Ju-87 D 25 and FW-190 F-8, capable of carrying bombs, 2-I and 3-I groups were armed with 39 FW-190 F-8, capable of carrying “Panzerblitz” missiles. But at the same time, there were only 26 pilots in the parts listed. In the near future, we expected five more aircraft adapted for the suspension of the Panzerschreck missiles. In mid-February, it became noticeable that the Soviet troops, after strikes by German attack aircraft from low altitudes, made the appropriate conclusions. In Kurland, during a single strike on Soviet troops, pilots of the SG 3 squadron, including the oak-leaf awarded to the Iron Cross, Major E. Erhard Jähnert, were met by numerous enemy air defense systems, mainly four-barreled anti-aircraft installations. However, the FW-190 F-8 speeds on descending reached a speed of up to 800 km / h, as a result of which German aircraft were targets for enemy air defense, which were hard to hit, and all German aircraft returned from this mission. However, because of the enemy’s strong air defense, the machines failed to accomplish the tasks assigned to them. 23 February 1945 two enemy tanks were hit during a raid, remaining to burn on the battlefield. Only in March, pilots of the SG 3 squadron could again strike at the enemy in Courland. 1 and 7 February 1 anti-tank squadron aircraft. (Pz) / SG 2 "Immelmann" were prepared for a massive attack on the enemy missiles "Panzerblitz", their first departure, which was attended by 4 aircraft FW-190 F-8, adverse weather conditions proved unsuccessful.

This squadron of the FN-12 F-190 8 aircraft capable of carrying Panzerblitz missiles was subordinated to the SG 3 squadron commander and based in Finow. Before 3 March, this squadron managed to destroy the enemy's 74 tank, and 39 tanks were damaged. The 6 March squadron of anti-tank 3 attack aircraft. (Pz) / SG 3 was relocated from Prenzlau to Macklit. Later, this squadron was transferred to Schönefeld (Schönefeld), where launchers for launching Panzerblitz missiles were installed on the FW-190 F-8 aircraft of this squadron. The headquarters of the air group was located in Perlenberg (Perlenberg). There, the staff squadron received the first FW-190, armed with anti-tank missiles. In the period between 9 and 13 March, 1945 SG 3 squadron struck the Soviet tanks, trying to surround the German troops. Rumors of miraculous weapons were spread among the German servicemen, some of which were already at the disposal of the German troops and which only remained to be used. But due to the lack of the required amount of fuel, relatively few sorties were made from Zabeln. The 10 March Squadron of 1 anti-tank attack aircraft. (Pz) / SG 2 was engaged in shooting practice, and therefore few people were surprised that these training shooting would hardly be enough for a full-fledged training course needed to deliver effective attacks on the enemy. 19 March 1945 city The 1 squadron. (Pz) / SG 2 was relocated to the Berlin-Schönefelde airfield (Berlin-Schönefelde), where it was handed over to the 4 airborne division. After the redeployed squadron was ready to attack the enemy, the first attacks on Soviet tanks were 22 and 28 in March of 1945 d. Then it turned out that only because of the inadequate training of German pilots, the target was struck by no more than 30% of missiles. The latter were produced by enemy tanks from a distance of 100 meters and at an angle between 10 and 20 degrees with respect to the horizontal plane. After improving the design of tubular launchers for launching rockets, as well as refining some fuses of missiles and the acquisition of practical skills by pilots, the effectiveness of strikes increased. Over the next weeks, the enemy surprisingly quickly made the appropriate conclusions, starting to use self-propelled four-barreled anti-aircraft guns to protect their tank units from the FW-190 F-8 attack aircraft. 21 March FW-190 F-8 squadrons 1 (Pz) / SG 2 made 32 combat sorties including 12 combat sorties made by Panzerblitz missiles. At the end of March, at least one machine capable of carrying Panzerblitz missiles was transferred to SG 3 squadron. 2-I squadron aviation group in the second half of March 1945. had 12 combat aircraft FW-190 F-8, capable of carrying missiles «Panzerblitz». Later, the FW-190 F-8 aircraft with Panzerblitz missiles began to enter service with the 3 / SG 4 air group. Before 21, the first squadron FW-190 F-8 with Panzerblitz missiles was formed on the 2 / SG 77 air group. Then the first anti-tank squadron, which also included 12 aircraft, appeared in the 3 / SG 77 air group. Since the beginning of February, the 1 (Pz) SG 9 squadron has begun to deliver its Ju-87 D-5 and G-2, having received at least 17 FW-190 F-8 with Panzerblitz missiles by the end of February. By 21, March 13 Squadron. (Pz) SG 151 had two FW-190 F-8 capable of carrying bombs and 15 of the same type of aircraft capable of carrying Panzerblitz missiles. In the following days, the squadron received a few more planes; as a result, the squadron was armed with 18 anti-tank attack aircraft. From the beginning of the battle in Silesia, the pilots of anti-tank squadrons were particularly effective. The attacks of the FW-190 F-8 missiles "Panzerblitz" led to difficulties in the tank formations of the Red Army, opposing the German troops. Together with the Hs-129 attack aircraft, the FW-190 F-8 aircraft with the Panzerblitz missiles achieved numerous hits in Soviet tanks. A volley with six anti-tank missiles increased the chance of hitting an enemy tank. In the course of the battle, the German attack aircraft pilots found that enemy formations had pulled up anti-aircraft units to the front edge, trying to hide in front of buildings and in the woods. In order to disable enemy anti-aircraft units, the FW-190 fighter squadron struck the detected anti-aircraft units using fragmentation bombs. The entire group of German aircraft covered from the air 2-3 squadron fighter Me-109 G-14 or Me-109 K-4. 22 March 1945 city in the 6th air alone navy there were four combat-ready squadrons with Panzerblitz anti-tank missiles. Another squadron 6 / SG 1 at that time was undergoing rearmament on anti-tank attack aircraft. For example, squadron 3. (Pz) SG 9 immediately after training began to carry out combat missions. In total, three squadrons were armed with Panzerschreck missiles: 8./SG 1, 6./SG 3 and 5./SG 77. In addition, squadrons 2. (Pz) SG 9 and 10. (Pz) / SG77, armed with aircraft Ju-87 D-3 and D-5 with Panzerblitz missiles, it was decided to try to use to strike at enemy tanks. Squadrons with Ju-87 aircraft could continue to use these machines, but the much more maneuverable FW-190 F-8s proved to be more efficient.

Only for 16 days, during which anti-tank attack aircraft made combat missions, pilots of the 3 / SG 4 group with Panzerblitz missiles destroyed the Soviet tank’s 23, another eleven were damaged, having lost the ability to move. 29 March 1945 The enemy squadron 1./SG 1, which was reinforced by 5./SG 151 squadron based in Fürstenwalde, was hit at the enemy. In late March, the entire aviation group 3 / SG was armed with aircraft capable of carrying anti-tank missiles. Another air group, 2 SG 3, was then based in Finow, and the 2 / SG 151 group was based in Gatow. Despite all the difficulties with the supply of weapons and other problems, the number of FW-190 F-8, capable of carrying the Panzerblitz and Panzerschreck missiles, has increased significantly by the end of March. Thus, the aviation group 3 / SG 77 was armed with 22 high-speed carrier anti-tank missiles. The 1 / SG 77 air group had 34 such aircraft. In the air group 2 / SG 77 were in service with the FW-190 F-8, capable of carrying missiles «Panzerschreck». Only in the 1 area of ​​responsibility of the German aviation division in March at least 172 Soviet tanks were destroyed from the air, and 70 were heavily damaged. In addition to tanks, 252 trucks were destroyed, and 92 damaged. Also 20 anti-aircraft guns were destroyed and 110 enemy aircraft were shot down. 1 On April, the 1 / SG 1 aviation group was still armed with nine aircraft capable of carrying Panzerblitz missiles. The 2-group of this squadron had fourteen aircraft, the 3-group - ten FW-190 F-8, capable of carrying Panzerschreck missiles. The headquarters of the aviation group was also armed with aircraft carrying anti-tank missiles. In addition, the squadron 13./SG 77 had eighteen combat aircraft. 7 1945 April, at the first half of the day, in battle again attended by numerous FW-190 F-8 missile «Panzerblitz»: the squadron possessed the SG 1 51 plane, the SG 3 42 aircraft, the SG 4 22 aircraft, the SG 9 25 aircraft and SG 77 –57 with FW-190 type aircraft. Not far from the front line, in the area of ​​responsibility of the 4 aviation division, four attack aircraft and a group of fighters struck at the enemy train. At the same time, at least one Panzerblitz rocket hit the locomotive, after which it was enveloped in smoke. During this departure, another blow was also delivered to another enemy, several of the 24 fired missiles hit the steam locomotive, which remained after that to stand on the railway track. The last wagons of the Soviet echelon at Sternenberg (Sternenberg) were hit by four missiles, and of the 12 locomotives fired at the locomotive, all fell far from the target.
Author:
391 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vard
    Vard 29 December 2017 17: 00 New
    +7
    The distance is 100 meters ... They messed up something ... And in general ... The best air defense ... These are tanks at the enemy airfield ...
    1. polpot
      polpot 29 December 2017 20: 19 New
      +3
      You are right in 1942 at the Tatsin airport it was proved
      1. yarema vishneveckiy
        yarema vishneveckiy 31 December 2017 09: 17 New
        +3
        Gallows thinking))) the best air defense is a fighter, air supremacy ... Where were the Stalinist fighters, falcons .. ??
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 31 December 2017 11: 35 New
          +2
          Somewhere in the spring and summer of 1943 appeared in sufficient quantity and quality.
        2. gerkost2012
          gerkost2012 2 January 2018 15: 12 New
          +4
          In 1945 they were over Berlin and, in general, over Germany! I would like the Putin falcons to be no worse.
          By the way, only dill in kind can call itself Yarema Vishnevetsky, and here the Russian flag will not hide this shit.
          1. Dalailama
            Dalailama 2 January 2018 16: 51 New
            +1
            Why would Ukrainians love this Pole?
            https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Вишневецкий,_Иереми
            я
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0GknP3A9lQ
          2. Vadivak
            Vadivak 5 January 2018 21: 54 New
            +3
            Quote: gerkost2012
            By the way, only dill in kind can call itself Yarema Vishnevetsky, and here the Russian flag will not hide this shit.

            He kind of mocked the Cossacks so that they even looked for him dead. And he died from eating cucumbers and washed them with honey, fell ill and died,
  2. Sergey-8848
    Sergey-8848 29 December 2017 17: 07 New
    11
    "... After the relocated squadron was ready to launch strikes against the enemy, the first strikes on Soviet tanks were delivered on March 22 and 28, 1945. Then it turned out that only due to the defective training of German pilots, the targets hit no more than 30 % missiles. The last were fired at enemy tanks from a distance 100 meters and at an angle between 10 and 20 degrees with respect to the horizontal plane ... "
    From a distance of 100 meters, not every PT artillery manages to shoot, and even Luftwaffe pilots in 1945 were instructed to launch rockets from 100 meters and escape from return fire, and from their own fragments, and even record numerous hits in enemy equipment ( with an indispensable indication of whom and how many times he hit) ???
    The author should be more critical of the source.
    1. Comrade
      30 December 2017 04: 20 New
      +3
      Quote: Sergey-8848
      Luftwaffe pilots in the 1945 year were enriched with 100 meters in flight ...... to record numerous hits in enemy equipment (with the indispensable indication of whom and how many times he hit)?

      Have you ever heard of photo guns?
      "A photo-machine gun or a photo-machine gun - an automatic photo or movie camera mounted on a combat aircraft as a means of objective control of the use of weapons, usually a small-gun gun. The inclusion of a photo machine gun is usually synchronized with firing switches (guns). Photo-guns were mounted on fighters, bombers attack aircraft and training aircraft. The images obtained with their help served as evidence of the victory of the pilot or gunner. "
      1. igordok
        igordok 30 December 2017 11: 29 New
        +4
        Quote: Comrade
        Photo guns were installed on fighters, bombers, attack aircraft and training aircraft. The images obtained with their help served as evidence of the victory of the pilot or gunner. "

        Pictures could indicate a hit, but not as a hit (victory), especially ground equipment.
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 30 December 2017 17: 10 New
          0
          If the cumulative warhead then hit the tank, then what usually happened?
      2. Dalailama
        Dalailama 1 January 2018 05: 30 New
        +1
        In this part, something from the “panzerblitz” and “panzershrek” in Latin just simply ruffles in places.
      3. Dalailama
        Dalailama 1 January 2018 06: 17 New
        0
        And what else is interesting to read from translations about the German Air Force? Only historical, or modern too?
  3. LeonidL
    LeonidL 29 December 2017 19: 51 New
    +9
    Storytellers however these German "assy" pen! Starting NURS or URS from 100 m and hitting the target ??? With a platform moving at a speed of 600km / h? Hundreds of wrecked tanks ??? It is clear who the heirs of the traditions of the Wehrmacht from the Armed Forces of Ukraine are learning from.
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 29 December 2017 20: 47 New
      +2
      In general, the closer the higher the probability. Where is 600km / h indicated? IL-2 ceased cannon fire less than 200m and it was more inert.
      1. LeonidL
        LeonidL 30 December 2017 05: 23 New
        +4
        Such is approximately the speed of the last fokers. But even if between 500 and 600 km / h with an aim firing range of 100 m, count the time for aiming, take into account the dispersion of rockets, especially on the basis of a ground faust cartridge ... you get a mid-ceiling. In addition, I haven’t read anywhere in tanker’s recollections about tank losses, all the more so in such numbers from attack by RS attack aircraft.
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 30 December 2017 05: 53 New
          +1
          And where is it written that he is Panzershrek hollowed at maximum speed? The article was about 800km / h from a dive from the Panzerblitz (with strong air defense and 0 results)
          the reactive Panzershrek is not a simple Faust cartridge, even RPG-2 didn’t reach it,
          photos of open guides in the article of the wrong system, they are for R4M in air defense
        2. Dalailama
          Dalailama 30 December 2017 06: 42 New
          +1
          the pilot had to take aim before approaching 100, take aim without holding his breath, butt and cheek and control the airplane it turned out worse, therefore the launch was not from 150-200 like a ground grenade launcher, but closer and subsequently a series of 6 pieces
      2. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 30 December 2017 19: 11 New
        +2
        You're right. There are no 600 km / h. This Munchausen writes
        [/ quote] high-speed FW-190 F-8 at a reduction developed speed to 800 km / h [quote]
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 30 December 2017 19: 25 New
          +1
          in a dive with feathering of the propeller, leaving the P-51 he developed more than 1000, bombs from a sufficient height fall on supersonic. Ilyushin at one time otmazatsya from the low speed of the IL-2 (386 near the ground, 414 max) saying that for the attack it is not needed much. Did the aviator not know about this?
          1. Aviator_
            Aviator_ 30 December 2017 19: 48 New
            +2
            The aviator is aware of such a phenomenon as the flow crisis (the emergence of local supersonic zones), the study of which cost the lives of the top ten test pilots in the middle of the 40's around the world. And about the 1000 km / h with such a midship as the FW-190, you need the Grimm brothers directly.
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 30 December 2017 20: 06 New
              0
              And so much weight. Then you need to google on FW-190 and how many and when in Germany there were wind tunnels, including supersonic ones.
              1. Aviator_
                Aviator_ 30 December 2017 21: 17 New
                +3
                No need for the Prandtl trophy tube, which was just brought to mind in TsAGI in 1947 under the name T-107. More M = 0,7 never gave. It still works. On our T-106 in 1943, the reason for the disaster BI-1 with the pilot George Bakhchivanji in March 1943 was found - these are the most local areas. And the first supersonic in the pipe was achieved here, in six months - at the Americans. And to you, who holyly believe in the writings of beaten German veterans, Hoffmann will be closer if the Grimm brothers do not like him.
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 30 December 2017 21: 40 New
                  0
                  So the wrong pipes were taken in trophies. The first supersonic wind tunnels in Germany appeared under Kaiser.
                  1. Aviator_
                    Aviator_ 30 December 2017 23: 05 New
                    +3
                    Dear, do you even know what the working part should be there? Explain: perforated. And it was created in 1943, first with us, then in the USA. And about the achievements in experimental aerodynamics under Kaiser Wilhelm - this is generally fantasy.
                    1. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 30 December 2017 23: 33 New
                      0
                      Under Kaiser in the experimental, then a couple of years later with the Weimar in the theoretical. His first supersonic wind tunnel was built in 1909. In 1912 there were several more with a Max 2,5.
                      1. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 31 December 2017 10: 25 New
                        +1
                        Sorry, but you are talking nonsense.
                      2. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 31 December 2017 10: 31 New
                        +1
                        This is whose first pipe, Kaiser Wilhelm? Did Treftz work for her?
                    2. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 31 December 2017 00: 08 New
                      +1
                      TsAGI Stalin's purges almost never touched. In the USA they were not at all.
                      1. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 31 December 2017 10: 28 New
                        +1
                        About the purges at TsAGI. They were, but with the exception of a number of leaders agreed upon by the Trotskyists (TsAGI chief Kharlamov), these purges were healing.
                    3. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 31 December 2017 10: 54 New
                      0
                      Quote: Aviator_
                      Sorry, but you are talking nonsense.

                      Why is it so?
                      Not sufficiently healthy, almost all Trotskyists remained to work. This organization then spoiled the aerodynamics of Soviet aircraft almost until the collapse of the USSR. For example, aerodynamic ridges. I also tried to kill the Su-27 to the last.
                      1. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 31 December 2017 16: 51 New
                        +2
                        Bullshit about a supersonic wind tunnel in the 1909 year. And further. The flow crisis associated with local supersonic zones led to the aircraft being pulled into a dive at a critical speed (on those subsonic profiles of the early 40's), from which there was no way out - the controls ceased to be effective. It was for leaving the aircraft at high speeds that it was necessary to develop ejection seats. As for the ridges on the swept wing (author - Academician Struminsky), they in 50 - 60 years allowed to master the speed range up to M = 2. I do not see anything "harmful Trotskyist" in their application.
                    4. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 31 December 2017 17: 56 New
                      0
                      Quote: Aviator_
                      Bullshit about a supersonic wind tunnel in 1909.

                      Why is it so?
                      The Germans only delayed the Me-262 due to an unsuccessful tail, Me-163 and others did not delay the aircraft. The FW-190 with a subsonic profile somehow emerged from a dive.
                      Quote: Aviator_
                      As for the ridges on the swept wing (author - academician Struminsky), in the years 50-60 they allowed to master the speed range up to M = 2.

                      How could American and other aircraft master without them?
                      1. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 31 December 2017 19: 46 New
                        +2
                        That's just it, that none of the above aircraft (Me-163, Me-262) did not go out a number higher than M = 0,7, and, accordingly, did not drag them into a dive. The design of the tail section has no relation to this at all, the main thing is the supporting profile. A FW-190 with a subsonic profile emerged from diving at a speed slightly higher than 600 km / h (M of the order of 0,5). As for the presence or absence of ridges, the set of profiles in the wing is responsible for everything. Our MiG-15 were on par with the F-86 Saber, the war in Korea proved it. There was still such a dead end for the Americans, as a direct thin wing of small elongation at supersonic, implemented on the F-104. A lot of speed records in the 50's, but in the operation of serial cars - a flying coffin.
                    5. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 31 December 2017 21: 34 New
                      +1
                      Once again, they forgot about the supersonic wind tunnel.
                      The Me-163 record is 1130km / h or Mach 0,91. The fact that the Me-262 was due to the tail of the Sukhovites figured out during the project on the Su-9 (first). FW-190 Max. the speed in horizontal flight is 685 km / h near the ground and 710 at altitude, so that the dive bombers themselves do not turn into bombs, they are equipped with advanced air-grille brakes.
                      The MiG-15 was itself lighter and had a more powerful engine, hence 1,45 times better thrust-to-weight ratio and somewhat better ceiling, only because something could do something in Korea against the F-86. The ridges were the wrong way, and much more. On supersonic aircraft, the controls are fully rotary.
                      1. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 31 December 2017 22: 00 New
                        +5
                        I don’t need to read the course in my main specialty, otherwise I will start asking you how to take the exam, and I will give an assessment. Thank you for the full-sway stabilizer said, usually I ask this question when it comes to choosing the rating "ud" or "unsuccessful". The ridges were out of place. Combat use with a strong opponent has proven this. MiG - 15 could not do something, but beat F-86, and very well.
                      2. NF68
                        NF68 3 January 2018 16: 28 New
                        +2
                        FW-190 max. horizontal speed 685km / h at the ground and 710 at altitude,


                        Dear colleague. You are mistaken about the maximum speed of the FW-190. The serial FW-190 D-9 with the Jumo-213 A-1 with the MW-50 system at ground level developed only 612 km / h - this was the highest rate for all FW-190. Especially for the Eastern Front, another version of the FW-190 D-9 with the Jumo-213 S engine / engine height 4500 meters / c MW-50 developed on take-off 2400 hp was developed. the speed of this option at ground level should be about 630 km / h. Or do you mention any prototype? For example, about the FW-190 D-9 c DB-603 EC c MW-50 which developed on take-off 2400 hp.? As far as I know, this option on take-off was supposed to develop a maximum speed of 625-630 km / h. Or is it a variant with an experimental DB-603 N engine which, on take-off, developed 2750 hp.?
                    6. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 31 December 2017 23: 07 New
                      0
                      What is your main specialty?
                      About :
                      In 1909, the world's first supersonic wind tunnel was built.

                      e.g. see
                      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Прандтль,_Людвиг
                      1. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 31 December 2017 23: 27 New
                        +5
                        The diploma says: aerodynamics and thermodynamics.
                        About Wikipedia: I advise you to be critical of this dump. Or does your habitat not give you such an opportunity? You kind of know the Russian language.
                    7. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 31 December 2017 23: 55 New
                      0
                      Why is this German supersonic wind tunnel still nonsense?
                      In response to the “wires”, another comment was sent to you with a large number of links (not about the pipe).
                      Just below this comment is another sensible comment from NF68 with the same flag.
                      1. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 1 January 2018 09: 52 New
                        +5
                        On the 1909 pipe, no research on local supersonic zones was, in principle, possible. It was a shock tube, a rather specific instrument, which at that time was of purely academic importance. They have been brought to mind for more than 50 years, and even now they are not used for profile research. With the same success, you can announce the outflow into the atmosphere from any air reservoir with a pressure difference of more than 1,89 supersonic pipe - formally, everything will be so, you will get supersonic sound in an underexpanded jet, but what's the point? The expiration from any aerosol can is direct evidence - the so-called "barrels" are sold there.
                    8. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 1 January 2018 19: 56 New
                      0
                      Is not a fact. In what year did they learn about its existence in 1909?
                      And from the T-107, they couldn’t take out any parts or replace them with others, which then, for example, were exhausted by self-roll?
                      At the first Su-9 (1946), which was not pulled anywhere, there were conventional stabilizers and a long straight wing. Laval nozzle was proposed in 1890.
                      1. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 1 January 2018 21: 58 New
                        +2
                        Could not. You see, the Laval nozzle and the working part of the wind tunnel are quite different things. A supersonic stream is one thing, a supersonic stream with great uniformity in a characteristic rhombus is another. Perforation is just needed to go through a lambda equal to 1 (there is such a criterion close to the number M)
                    9. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 1 January 2018 22: 44 New
                      0
                      Was the insert with the primation in the pipe not screwed on rivets, or was the chisel not yet invented?
                      From the laval nozzle there is at least a tapering half next to the laminator.
                      1. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 1 January 2018 22: 52 New
                        +3
                        Dear, there is such a book by A. K. Martynov “Experimental Aerodynamics”, Oborongiz, 1950. Find and read. SC (Communication ending)
                    10. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 1 January 2018 23: 24 New
                      0
                      She was written later than all this. C'mon, the support nodes of the suspension of gas centrifuges (which also brought to mind for a long time) could be carried away in the bag. And there was nearby the Institute of Gas Dynamics, which was called differently.
                      Is there anything in this book about how all planes except Soviet flew without aerodynamic ridges?
                    11. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 3 January 2018 03: 48 New
                      0
                      If the lack of problems with the wave crisis on the Me-163 with 0,91 Mach is nothing, then the FW-190 served the Baltic Fleet well after the war and its pilots could be convinced of the LTX and its controllability at such dive speeds, while your TsAGI continued to spoil the captured German wind tunnel. This is also not only on Wikipedia.
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 12 January 2018 10: 01 New
                        0
                        What do you mean by the concept of "wave crisis" and, in your opinion, when does it occur? What does it depend on?
                      2. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 13 January 2018 12: 53 New
                        0
                        A little higher to the Aviator with these questions. Or a lower fighter angel.
        2. NF68
          NF68 31 December 2017 16: 47 New
          +3
          Quote: Aviator_
          You're right. There are no 600 km / h. This Munchausen writes
          high-speed FW-190 F-8 at a reduction developed speed to 800 km / h


          The real battles on the Soviet-German front were noticeably different from the "fights" at the testing institute. German pilots did not engage in maneuver battles in either the vertical or horizontal plane. Their fighters sought a surprise attack to bring down a Soviet aircraft, and then went into the clouds or on their territory. Attack aircraft also unexpectedly rained down on our ground forces. It was rare to intercept both those and others. Special tests conducted at the Air Force Research Institute were aimed at developing techniques and methods for dealing with the Focke-Wulf attack aircraft. They involved trophy FW 190A-8 No. 682011 and the "lightweight" FW 190A-8 No. 580967, to which the most modern fighters of the Red Army Air Force flew: Yak-3. Yak-9U and La-7.

          The "battles" showed that for a successful fight against low-flying German aircraft it is necessary to develop new tactics. After all, most often the Focke-Wulfs approached at low altitudes and left with a shaving flight at maximum speeds. In these conditions, it turned out to be difficult to detect the attack in a timely manner, and the pursuit was complicated, since the matte gray color hid the German car against the background of the terrain. In addition, the FW 190 pilots included an engine boost device at low altitudes. The testers determined that in this case, the Fokke-Wulfs reached the 582 km / h speed near the ground, that is, neither the Yak-3 (the plane available at the Air Force Research Institute developed the speed of 567 km / h), nor the Yak- 9Y (575 km / h). Only La-7 in the afterburner accelerated to 612 km / h, but the speed margin was not enough to quickly reduce the distance between two aircraft to the distance of aimed fire.

          Based on the test results, the Institute’s management issued recommendations: it is necessary to echelon our fighter patrols in altitude. In this case, the task of the pilots of the upper tier would be to disrupt the bombing, as well as to attack the cover fighters accompanying the attack aircraft, and the attack aircraft themselves would most likely be able to intercept the lower patrol cars, which had the ability to disperse on a gentle dive.

          http://www.airpages.ru/lw/fw190a7.shtmlhttp://www
          .airpages.ru / lw / fw190a7.shtml
          1. Dalailama
            Dalailama 1 January 2018 05: 48 New
            +1
            This robbery over Kurland then very quickly stopped the Yak-9U with M-107 and American oil, with the loss ratio for LW (which had the same war all over) just unrealistic, for which instead of the “reinforced” one earned the nickname “killer”.
          2. fighter angel
            fighter angel 2 January 2018 21: 27 New
            0
            For NF-68: The article is new, and the text in the comments is the same, right? Let me remind you, "British Fighter" - write the same thing. Are you not a bot for an hour? And the same links, the source is not clear by whom and on the basis of what is written. What do you say, a connoisseur of YuMO and Daimler-Benz of the 600 series?
            1. sd68
              sd68 3 January 2018 15: 02 New
              0
              But in fact, is he right?
              1. fighter angel
                fighter angel 4 January 2018 00: 56 New
                +1
                He has been trying to push this "essence" here for a long time. His global mistake is that he studies the Great Patriotic War and WWII only from the “other” side. He operates on the opinions of "Western" and German analysts. About Soviet and modern Russian aviation historians, and generally military historians, he did not hear, did not read, did not study, and did not know ... And he was trying to approve with an authoritative air. His "authority" was questioned by me and "nullified" back in an article about He-219, "The Fighter of the British." He has no thoughts of his own - solid "patterns" and quotes from Western sources.
                1. NF68
                  NF68 7 January 2018 22: 20 New
                  0
                  Quote: fighter angel
                  His global mistake is that he studies the Great Patriotic War and WWII only from the “other” side. He operates on the opinions of "Western" and German analysts. About Soviet and modern Russian aviation historians, and generally military historians, he did not hear, did not read, did not study, and did not know ...


                  Do not really really stupidly brazenly lie. I cite more Soviet sources than German ones and each time I indicate which sources it is:

                  eg:

                  FW-190D at the Air Force Research Institute. The war had already ended when German piston planes used by the Nazis in the final period of the fighting arrived for testing. First of all, our engineers studied the FW 190D-9 (or the "long-nosed Dora"). The D — 9 model fighter replaced the well-known air-cooled BMW 80ID engine with a Jumo 21 liquid cooling engine. This event slightly improved the aerodynamics of the propeller group and increased the length of the aircraft by 80 cm. A more powerful engine promised the superiority of the new machine in speed and climb over the FW 190A. Our country knew about the opposite way of modifying some fighters: by replacing the liquid-cooled motor with a more powerful one, cooled by oil and air flow (LaGG-3 -> La-5; Ki 61-> Ki 100). How much has the ratio of the main flight data of the German "long-nosed fokker" and the best serial fighter aircraft of the Red Army changed? According to leading specialists of the Air Force Research Institute, the modified FW 190D-9 No. 210251 could not compete on equal and low levels with the domestic Yak-3, Yak-9U, La-7. The Focke-Wulf was inferior to them in speed at ground speed by at least 24 km / h, and by 5000 m by more than 10 km / h. Also not in favor of the German fighter was a comparison of horizontal and vertical maneuverability.

                  The greatest interest for the domestic industry was caused by the successful layout of motor units and propeller equipment, the highest maximum permissible oil temperature at the engine inlet (130 ° C), the successful design of an automatic coolant temperature controller, and wooden blades with high efficiency. that during the tests from 11 to 26 on May 1945, all units of the special equipment of the German aircraft worked flawlessly. Of great benefit was the study of the special unit of the FUG-16ZY radio station, which made it possible to use the receiver of this station in the radio navigation system.

                  A well-developed fire control system was supplemented by high quality bulletproof glass of the cockpit lantern and a successful sight design. Unlike some of our vehicles with powerful weapons, at the same time firing from all firing points, the aiming at the target was not lost, and the recoil force of the weapon was almost not felt by the pilot. It was possible to shoot separately from guns and machine guns. Extensive electrification of equipment simplified the work of the pilot.

                  The FW 190D-9 fighter was used for training aerial combat with La-7, which showed the complete advantage of the domestic machine. Pilots of the institute, engineer-lieutenant colonel A.G. Kochetkov, lieutenant colonels A.G. Proshakov and V.I. -190. Having started the “battle” on the opposite courses, the Soviet fighter stepped into the tail of the “German” after the third turn or the second combat turn. However, it should be noted that the “battles” were conducted without the use of an emergency mode of operation of the engine with the injection of water-methanol mixture.

                  http://www.airpages.ru/lw/fw190d.shtml

                  The real battles on the Soviet-German front were noticeably different from the "fights" at the testing institute. German pilots did not engage in maneuver battles in either the vertical or horizontal plane. Their fighters sought a surprise attack to bring down a Soviet aircraft, and then went into the clouds or on their territory. Attack aircraft also unexpectedly rained down on our ground forces. It was rare to intercept both those and others. Special tests conducted at the Air Force Research Institute were aimed at developing techniques and methods for dealing with the Focke-Wulf attack aircraft. They involved trophy FW 190A-8 No. 682011 and the "lightweight" FW 190A-8 No. 580967, to which the most modern fighters of the Red Army Air Force flew: Yak-3. Yak-9U and La-7.

                  The "battles" showed that for a successful fight against low-flying German aircraft it is necessary to develop new tactics. After all, most often the Focke-Wulfs approached at low altitudes and left with a shaving flight at maximum speeds. In these conditions, it turned out to be difficult to detect the attack in a timely manner, and the pursuit was complicated, since the matte gray color hid the German car against the background of the terrain. In addition, the FW 190 pilots included an engine boost device at low altitudes. The testers determined that in this case, the Fokke-Wulfs reached the 582 km / h speed near the ground, that is, neither the Yak-3 (the plane available at the Air Force Research Institute developed the speed of 567 km / h), nor the Yak- 9Y (575 km / h). Only La-7 in the afterburner accelerated to 612 km / h, but the speed margin was not enough to quickly reduce the distance between two aircraft to the distance of aimed fire.

                  Based on the test results, the Institute’s management issued recommendations: it is necessary to echelon our fighter patrols in altitude. In this case, the task of the pilots of the upper tier would be to disrupt the bombing, as well as to attack the cover fighters accompanying the attack aircraft, and the attack aircraft themselves would most likely be able to intercept the lower patrol cars, which had the ability to disperse on a gentle dive.

                  http://www.airpages.ru/lw/fw190a7.shtml

                  Modification Bf.109k-4
                  Wingspan, m 10.00
                  Length, m 8.85
                  Height, m ​​2.50
                  Wing area, m2 16.10
                  empty aircraft
                  normal takeoff 3100
                  maximum takeoff 3400
                  Engine type 1 PD Daimler-Benz DB 605ASCM
                  Power, hp 1 x 2000
                  Maximum speed km / h
                  off the ground xnumx
                  at a height of 8700 m 695
                  Practical range, km 570
                  Max. rate of climb, m / min 1470
                  Practical ceiling, m 12500
                  Crew, people 1
                  Armament: one 30-mm gun MK 103 or 108 with 60 shells and
                  two 15-mm MG 151 guns with 220 shells per barrel.

                  http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fww2/bf109k.html
                  1. Dalailama
                    Dalailama 8 January 2018 01: 15 New
                    +1
                    To shoot down at the end of the war the last modifications of the FW-190 below on the aisle or drag them into a carousel and shoot there, only the Yak-9U with the M-107 engine could. With the M-105 engine, even the Yak-3 could not do this.
            2. NF68
              NF68 3 January 2018 16: 47 New
              +1
              For NF-68: The article is new, and the text in the comments is the same, right? Let me remind you, "British Fighter" - write the same thing. Are you not a bot for an hour? And the same links, the source is not clear by whom and on the basis of what is written.


              Are you not an ardent atheist or an adherent of any sect living solely by its own laws for an hour ?. What I am writing is based on the sources at my disposal. The author of the book I translate Manfred Griehl
              https://www.amazon.de/Manfred-Griehl/e/B00456SL06
              / ref = dp_byline_cont_book_1

              This is not his only book about aviation.
              This book has 312 pages. I am translating this book in parts, therefore the source is the same. This, by the way, is also indicated. It is strange that you did not understand this, although it was also written about it.
              1. fighter angel
                fighter angel 4 January 2018 01: 07 New
                0
                As for the sect, would be silent, dear man !!! There you have how many "68" - and NF and SD ... And in the last article and the ruby ​​was with similar numbers. So if there is a sect here, it is only on your side. And when, more than a month ago, we discussed the article “The Fighter of the British” with you, did you also “spy” excerpts from the manifesto? Somehow, somehow, for a long time you have been translating it ... Just something 312 pages, and messing around for more than a month ...
                1. NF68
                  NF68 4 January 2018 23: 58 New
                  +1
                  Quote: fighter angel
                  As for the sect, would be silent, dear man !!! There you have how many "68" - and NF and SD ... And in the last article and the ruby ​​was with similar numbers. So if there is a sect here, it is only on your side. And when, more than a month ago, we discussed the article “The Fighter of the British” with you, did you also “spy” excerpts from the manifesto? Somehow, somehow, for a long time you have been translating it ... Just something 312 pages, and messing around for more than a month ...


                  In general, I confirm my opinion with the data I have, and if you are not able to understand this, then this is your problem. You didn’t manage to bring anything worthwhile except for the statement that the FW-190 D9 with the Jumo-213 engine developed on take-off on afterburner 2240 hp. according to your data, it developed only 576 km / h near the earth. Maybe, as an expert in aerodynamics, explain this phenomenon since in tests in the USSR the FW-190 with the BMW-801 D2 engine developed only 2000 hp at takeoff at ground level. for some reason, developed horizontally 582 km / h. And at the same time, the cross-sectional area of ​​the front of the fuselage due to him with an air-cooled engine was slightly larger than that of the “Dora 9”, and the normal take-off / flight weight of both aircraft was almost the same. Or do you remember that when testing the FW-190 D9 in the USSR, they did not use the afterburner, which was noted in the test report?

                  As for the translation of 312 pages, both my colleague and I have something to do along with these translations.
                  1. fighter angel
                    fighter angel 5 January 2018 12: 20 New
                    0
                    In addition to this notorious Dora, do you even know any types of planes? In the article “The British Fighter” on “Dora” I ended the discussion with you, for talking to someone who does not hear and “stamps” information from the same but there is no source-sense. About the air battles of the Great Patriotic War, you have no idea. You only know the performance characteristics of German engines and aircraft. Nothing more !!! What to talk about with you ??? You are fixated on “Dor” - and this is a disturbing syndrome! If this goes on, then you will soon have to contact me, and the appropriate specialist doctor. Think about it ... Genius Translator.
                    1. NF68
                      NF68 7 January 2018 16: 04 New
                      +1
                      Quote: fighter angel
                      In addition to this notorious Dora, do you even know any types of planes? In the article “The British Fighter” on “Dora” I ended the discussion with you, for talking to someone who does not hear and “stamps” information from the same but there is no source-sense. About the air battles of the Great Patriotic War, you have no idea. You only know the performance characteristics of German engines and aircraft. Nothing more !!! What to talk about with you ??? You are fixated on “Dor” - and this is a disturbing syndrome! If this goes on, then you will soon have to contact me, and the appropriate specialist doctor. Think about it ... Genius Translator.


                      Where do I get to a specialist in aerodynamics. They bought a diploma on the occasion.


                      There you have how many "68" - and NF and SD.


                      You can immediately see a truly “smart” person. Could you come up with anything else?
                      1. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 8 January 2018 01: 11 New
                        0
                        There, it was apparently taught in discussions here that even if so, the money was not wasted.
                    2. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 8 January 2018 01: 34 New
                      +1
                      Quote: fighter angel
                      You except this notorious

                      If you were a specialist in aerodynamics, could you explain the miracles with aerodynamic ridges and profiles and about the wave crisis on airplanes, otherwise Aviator_ somehow avoided answering when they noticed that there were no air ridges on any airplanes other than Soviet ones?
                      1. fighter angel
                        fighter angel 9 January 2018 12: 47 New
                        0
                        I do not intend to discuss anything with the nonsense you are, the Dalaylam.
                      2. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 12 January 2018 10: 04 New
                        0
                        If you are a specialist in aerodynamics could not explain miracles with aerodynamic ridges and profiles and about the wave crisis on airplanes,
                        What miracles do you mean? Will they suit you ?:

                        What do you mean by “wave crisis on airplanes”?
                      3. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 12 January 2018 10: 06 New
                        0
                        when he noticed that these ridges on any aircraft other than Soviet were not?
                        Isn't that "these crests"?

                        Blah blah blah, dear?
                      4. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 13 January 2018 12: 18 New
                        0
                        The spec is here as stated by the Aviator, and the question would be for a fighter angel.
                        Wrong drawn. More harm to yaw. Questions here and above should not to me but to them.
                        This is the F-102 air defense interceptor to which they are not critical, which was worse than the CF-105 anyway, and on which they appeared only when TsAGI began to ask questions in the USSR why there are no ridges on western planes.
                    3. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 9 January 2018 13: 06 New
                      0
                      Well, at least you have a specialty in diploma?
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 12 January 2018 10: 10 New
                        0
                        And you? You are so interested in this of all your opponents that you might think that you are a Cambridge diplomat and, at least, the Head of the Northrop representative office in Germany. And you need to grow up to a dispute with you. laughing
                      2. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 15 January 2018 03: 57 New
                        0
                        The specialty in diploma was not mentioned by me first.
            3. NF68
              NF68 5 January 2018 18: 35 New
              +1
              Quote: fighter angel
              For NF-68: The article is new, and the text in the comments is the same, right? Let me remind you, "British Fighter" - write the same thing. Are you not a bot for an hour? And the same links, the source is not clear by whom and on the basis of what is written. What do you say, a connoisseur of YuMO and Daimler-Benz of the 600 series?


              For that matter, there were a lot of 600 series and all of them are divided into 5 groups: from DB-600 to DB-632 and the difference in these groups of engines is very, very big. The numbering of Daimler-Benz engines began with the 600:

              A. New developments (DB 604, 609, 630).
              B. Special options (DB 607, 612, 632).
              C. Twin engine (DB 606,610,613 as well as 615,619,620).
              D. Engines with multi-stage superchargers (DB 627, 628, 631).
              E. Turbocharged engines (DB 621,622, 623, 624, 625, 626, 629).

              https://www.google.de/search?rlz=1C1MSIM_enDE635D
              E635&ei=bppPWvOBE8etsAGt7q6wCA&q=%D1%80%D
              0%B0%D0%B7%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BA%D0
              %B0+%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0
              %BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%85+%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0
              %B0%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B9+%D1%84%D0%B8%D1
              %80%D0%BC%D1%8B+%D0%94%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BC%D0%BB%D0
              %B5%D1%80-%D0%91%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%86&oq=%D1%80%
              D0%B0%D0%B7%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BA%D
              0%B0+%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D
              0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%85+%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B3%D
              0%B0%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B9+%D1%84%D0%B8%D
              1%80%D0%BC%D1%8B+%D0%94%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BC%D0%BB%D
              0%B5%D1%80-%D0%91%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%86&gs_l=psy-
              ab.3..33i160k1.1702.40037.0.41526.80.59.0.5.5.0.3
              54.7793.1j35j9j2.48.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..29.3
              5.5112.0..0j0i131k1j0i67k1j0i3k1j0i30k1j0i19k1j0i
              13i30k1j0i22i30k1.100.tHsAg5TnMBg

              I can also recall the materials of Karl Prestel about the development of aircraft engines from BMW:
              http://alternathistory.com/aviatsionnye-dvigateli
              -firm-siemensbramo-bmw-po-materialam-karla-preste
              lya?form_build_id=form-8d947b59c95c52b729b7c9e2a9
              a9cad6 & form_id = comment_controls & mode = 1 & am
              p;order=1&comments_per_page=30&op=%25D0%2
              5A1%25D0%25BE%25D1%2585%25D1%2580%25D0%25B0%25D0%
              25BD%25D0%25B8%25D1%2582%25D1%258C+%25D0%25BD%25D
              0%25B0%25D1%2581%25D1%2582%25D1%2580%25D0%25BE%25
              D0%25B9%25D0%25BA%25D0%25B8
              1. fighter angel
                fighter angel 6 January 2018 00: 20 New
                0
                nf68 --- Here and again prove your limitations !!! WHAT FOR? I already understood everything perfectly - EXCEPT GERMAN ENGINES YOU DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING !!! Therefore, it’s pointless to talk about anything else with you. Run down further into “UMO” and “DB” - it’s not possible to talk about anything else with you. You are a limited person who believes that the history of technology, and indeed the history of WWII, is written only by Western and overseas "researchers." Translate them and bow down before them! I don’t see any sense in continuing the conversation with you.
                1. NF68
                  NF68 7 January 2018 16: 05 New
                  +1
                  So once again prove your limitations !!! WHAT FOR? I already understood everything perfectly - EXCEPT GERMAN ENGINES YOU DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING !!! Therefore, it’s pointless to talk about anything else with you. Run down further into “UMO” and “DB” - it’s not possible to talk about anything else with you. You are a limited person who believes that the history of technology, and indeed the history of WWII, is written only by Western and overseas "researchers." Translate them and bow down before them! I don’t see any sense in continuing the conversation with you.


                  Maybe you, mister good, stop throwing tantrums already?
                  1. fighter angel
                    fighter angel 9 January 2018 12: 54 New
                    0
                    What is it? Is it really an eye prick? If there are no other arguments, then naturally, we must talk about tantrums, seizures, epilepsy, etc.
                    1. NF68
                      NF68 9 January 2018 17: 17 New
                      0
                      Quote: fighter angel
                      What is it? Is it really an eye prick? If there are no other arguments, then naturally, we must talk about tantrums, seizures, epilepsy, etc.


                      What the hell is your truth. I supposedly asked you a specialist in aerodynamics 2 times on the subject of how equal in take-off and flight weight planes one of which has take-off power of an engine with air cooling in 2000 hp. at ground level, according to the results obtained at the Air Force Research Institute, the Red Army developed 582 km / h at ground level / the Germans indicated a speed of 578 km / h. can at a minimum height have a lower maximum speed than a fighter with a water-cooled engine with a power of 2240 hp.? And again I bring you real data obtained during the tests of German captured equipment in the USSR. In addition, I also cite German data which, by the way, in many cases are not much and differ from those that were received by the Germans. And if there are differences, then in Soviet sources this is directly indicated. But this does not convince you either. You can look at both English and American data. And there, too, the differences are minimal.

                      It would not be bad if you, in turn, brought any arguments instead of just throwing tantrums. How do you feel about it then?
          3. Dalailama
            Dalailama 3 January 2018 23: 55 New
            0
            FW-190 D-9 served as the prototype for Ta-152
            Junkers Jumo motor 213A 1,287 kW (1,750 PS, 1,726 hp) or 1,508 kW (2,050 PS, 2,022 hp) with boost (model 213E)
            others showed less.
            1. NF68
              NF68 5 January 2018 18: 44 New
              +1
              Quote: DalaiLama
              FW-190 D-9 served as the prototype for Ta-152
              Junkers Jumo motor 213A 1,287 kW (1,750 PS, 1,726 hp) or 1,508 kW (2,050 PS, 2,022 hp) with boost (model 213E)
              others showed less.


              Well no. The engines you mentioned worked on B4 gasoline with an octane rating of 87-89 units, and there were other options developed for C3 gasoline with an octane rating of 95-100 units and these engines were more powerful than those you mentioned:

              Jumo-213 A. The first modification of this engine was intended for bombers (there was no possibility of installing an automatic gun in the collapse of the cylinders). A pre-production batch of this modification was released in 1942. Large-scale production was launched in August 1944. Takeoff power 1750 hp (1285 kW.), Altitude 5,5 km. Single-stage supercharger 2's high-speed. With the MW-50 system, the engine could develop 10 hp in 2100 minutes. (1540 kW.). Then, for at least 5 minutes, the engine should work in normal mode. When the MW-50 system was switched on, the boost pressure increased by 0,28 atm. At an altitude of 5 km, the power developed by the engine was 1900 hp. (1395 kW.). This version of the engine was intended primarily for installation on Ju-88 Ju-188 bombers.

              Jumo-213 AG. A variant of the Jumo-213 A engine with a more powerful supercharger with take-off power of 1900 hp. (1400 kW.). Designed for installation on the FW-190 fighter of the D-9 series. With the MW-50 system, engine power for 10 minutes could be increased to 2240 hp. At the same time, the altitude of the engine decreased from 5,5 km to 4,75 km. With the GM-1 FW-190 system, the D-9 series at an altitude of 10 km developed a speed of 700 km / h, which made it possible to successfully fight enemy high-altitude fighters. This speed was higher than that of the FW-190 D-11 with the Jumo-213 F high-altitude engine without using the GM-1 system. The flip side of the coin was that 105 kg of mixture for the GM-1 system on board was only enough for 15-17 minutes of flight. Jumo-213 AG for FW-190 D-9 fighters was delivered to aircraft assembly plants complete with a total weight of 1350 kg with a Junkers VS 111 propeller, a motor frame, a radiator with armor, a coolant temperature regulator, jet tailpipes, a warm air distributor for heating airborne weapons and sensors for measuring height and temperature. The version that was produced for 2's motor planes was slightly different from the one planned for single-engine fighters. This option was made in the form of a “Unified power plant” and was interchangeable with the DB-603 power plant, which had somewhat larger overall dimensions, but about the same weight. In addition, there was a warm air intake system for heating the cockpit and wings and an 3000 watt generator.

              Jumo-213 B. A special version with a higher compression ratio that developed take-off power of 2000 hp. (1470 kW.) This option was developed for gasoline with an octane rating of 95 units. The engine was tested on a test bench, but due to an acute shortage of high-performance aviation gasoline, this modification was not mass-produced.

              Jumo-213 C. Variant of Jumo-213 A, intended for installation on fighters, on which it was possible to install an automatic gun in the collapse of the cylinders. The rotor angle adjustment system has been changed. The engine had a flange to which an automatic gun was attached. Serial production began in September 1944.

              Jumo-213 E. This version was originally a Jumo-213 A / C engine running on gasoline with an octane rating of 95. Altitude 9,8 km. 2-x supercharger 3-x supercharger with built-in charge air cooler. The take-off power of the Jumo-213 E1 variant running on B4 gasoline with an octane rating of 87 1750 hp (1285 kW.) At first it was decided to produce a more powerful version of the Jumo-213 E 0 with take-off power 1870 hp. (1375 kW.) Powered by C3 gasoline with an octane rating of 95 units. In the future, the developers expected an increase in take-off power to 2000 hp. (1470 kW.) But since by the middle of 1943 the production of C3 gasoline did not fully satisfy the needs of the Luftwaffe, they decided to develop and mass-produce a slightly less powerful Jumo-213 E1 for which B4 gasoline with 87 octane was produced in large quantities. With the MW-50 system, which could be used at altitudes below the calculated power, the Jumo-213 E1 increased by 300 hp. The flow rate of the water-methanol mixture was 150 l / h. The engine could operate in this mode for no more than 10 minutes, after which it was necessary to turn off the system for at least 5 minutes. Using the GM-1 system at heights higher than the calculated one allowed for a short period of time to achieve an increase in power up to 400 hp. The flow rate of the mixture supplied by the GM-1 system could be selected depending on the need -60,100 and 150 g / s.

              Jumo-213 EV A more powerful version of the Jumo-213 E engine with a more efficient supercharger with take-off power of 1900 hp. (1400 kW.). There was a supercharger designed to provide high power characteristics of the engine at low altitudes. The engine has been tested on a test bench. At the beginning of 1945, preparations were made for the serial production of this modification. The altitude of this option was 9 km. against 9,8 km. Jumo-213 E1.

              Jumo-213 F. This option was a Jumo-213 E without intermediate cooling of the injected air whose function was performed by the injection system of a mixture of methanol and water (MW-50). At ground level, this engine developed a maximum power of 2120 hp. (1560 kW.). Altitude 9,5 km. In 1945, preparations were made for the mass production of this option. About ten pre-production batch engines were delivered to Focke-Wulf aircraft assembly plants and were mounted on Fw-190 D-11 fighters taking part in the hostilities. The scanty number of Fw-190 D-11 troops deployed did not allow any serious impact on the enemy although these fighters proved to be very good.

              Jumo-213 J. This version was a thoroughly revised version of a high-altitude engine in which the cylinder diameter was increased to 155 mm compared to 150 mm in the original version. The piston stroke remains the same 165 mm. Engine capacity became equal to 37,36 liters. Maximum engine speed increased to 3700 rpm. The engine received new cylinder heads with 4 instead of 3 valves per cylinder. In addition, the engine received a more efficient supercharger and a more advanced engine cooling system. By the end of the war, the engine was finalized and it began to be tested in extreme haste on a test bench without the necessary supercharger and a number of units. A complete test cycle at the stand failed. It was expected to receive takeoff power 2250 hp. (1655 kW.). With the MW-50 2600 hp system (1910 kW.). Due to the extremely high operating parameters of this engine, its engine life was supposed to be only 40-50 hours, which made it possible to use this option mainly only on fighters. The altitude of this option was 10 km.

              Jumo-213 S was intended specifically for the Eastern Front where air battles were mainly fought at heights below average. The take-off power of this engine was 2400 hp. The height is 4500 meters. Toward the end of the war, work on this rather simple version was close to completion.

              Jumo-213 T. This option was a high-altitude engine with a turbocharger (ATL). The power of this engine at ground level should be equal to the power of options A, C or E (1750 hp. (1285 kW.). At an altitude of 11,4 km, the design power should be 1600 hp. 1160 kW.

              http://alternathistory.com/aviatsionnyi-dvigatel-
              bolshoi-moshchnosti-jumo-xnumx-germaniya
              1. Dooplet11
                Dooplet11 12 January 2018 10: 13 New
                0
                You should not do this. I'm afraid DalaiLama will not adequately perceive such a volume of text with numbers and terms. sad
                1. NF68
                  NF68 12 January 2018 16: 19 New
                  0
                  Quote: Dooplet11
                  What is there to understand? Everything is described in sufficient detail and at the same time without unnecessary "subtleties".


                  What is there to understand? Everything is described in sufficient detail and at the same time without unnecessary "subtleties".
                2. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 13 January 2018 12: 50 New
                  0
                  No need for me, what are your findings on you unread?
            2. NF68
              NF68 7 January 2018 16: 08 New
              +1
              In total, four prototypes were built for the Ta 152С series: Fw 190 V21 / U1, Ta 152 V6, Ta 152 V7 and Ta 152 V8.

              The prototype Fw 190V21 / U1 (W.Nr.0043, TI + IH) made its first flight 3 on November 1944 at the factory airfield in Adelheide. The DB 603E engine was installed on it. After the first flight, the aircraft was flown to Langenhagen, and on November 18 was handed over to Daimler Benz, where the DB 603LA VI6 engine was soon installed on it. V21 / U1 flight tests with DB 603LA continued until March 1945.

              The second V6 prototype (W.Nr.110 006, VH + EY) made its first flight on December 12 1944. The EC DB engine was installed on the prototype. On the V603, a wing with an area of ​​6 m19,5, a MW 2 system, heating panels for the side windows of the lantern, an ETC fuselage bomb holder and wooden flaps were installed. The take-off weight of the aircraft reached 50 kg. Small arms consisted of two MG 4370 in the fuselage and two MG 151 in the root of the wing. During the tests, Ta 151V152 showed high maximum speeds: in combat mode (6 rpm) - 2500 km / h at sea level and 547 km / h at maximum altitude, in emergency mode (647 rpm) - 2700 km / h at sea level and 617 km / h at maximum altitude.
              1. Dalailama
                Dalailama 8 January 2018 01: 06 New
                +1
                It was taken from the English wiki. It is consistent with the tests at the Baltic Fleet. Long-haired high-altitude D with weakened weapons could not fly slower than the assault FW-190, which then were not in service in the USSR, only she.
                1. NF68
                  NF68 8 January 2018 16: 00 New
                  0
                  Quote: DalaiLama
                  It was taken from the English wiki. It is consistent with the tests at the Baltic Fleet. Long-haired high-altitude D with weakened weapons could not fly slower than the assault FW-190, which then were not in service in the USSR, only she.


                  Such data on the Internet is not enough. And on many Russian-language sites, they are also missing. This "weakened armament of the serial version of the FW-190 D-9 was not so weak. No matter how, the 2 MG-151 cannons with ammunition for 250 cannon shells and the 2 MG-131 machine gun with 475 machine gun cartridges be considered weakened.
                  In addition to the production samples of the FW-190 D-9 with Jumo-213 AG engines, there were still prototypes with DB-603 A, DB-603 E engines. I have data. And there were options with DB-603 G and at least one prototype FW-190 D-9 with a Jumo-213 AG engine that worked not like the serial FW-190 D-9 on B4 gasoline with an octane rating of 87-89 units was tested and with C3 brand gasoline with an octane rating of 95-100 units. The take-off power of this engine without water-methanol boost was approximately 2000 hp. like the non-serial Jumo-213 B. This variant at an altitude of 6600 meters developed a speed of 712 km / h-serial FW-190 D9 at the same altitude developed only 685-686 km / h. I somehow came across references about the experienced FW-190 D-9 with DB-603 G and DB-603 EC engines, as well as about Me-109 with Jumo-213, but so far I have not been able to find the details.
                  1. Dalailama
                    Dalailama 8 January 2018 23: 59 New
                    0
                    Weakened compared to the assault. A container was hung under it in several 30mm guns if necessary.
                    1. NF68
                      NF68 9 January 2018 17: 22 New
                      0
                      Weakened compared to the assault. A container was hung under it in several 30mm guns if necessary.


                      So attack aircraft, they are attack aircraft created on the basis of fighters. FW-190 D9 2 20 mm. guns in the root parts of the wings and 2 13 mm. machine guns are standard weapons, and everything else mounted on the Dora's wings is already additional weapons that the Germans were forced to install specifically to deal with heavy Allied bombers.
                      1. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 12 January 2018 07: 43 New
                        0
                        He was usually hung up when attacking bombers, those that were covered from an escort without a container. If he went into a dive, or it could be lost. It’s easier to shoot a cannon container than to lose an entire plane and usually a pilot.
                2. Dooplet11
                  Dooplet11 16 January 2018 10: 06 New
                  0
                  About the results of the tests at the Baltic Fleet, where did you get the information from? From google? Were there any? Got reports? Or is it your imagination again and you will send it to Google ("go there, I don’t know where, look for that, I don’t know what")?
                  1. Dalailama
                    Dalailama 17 January 2018 04: 41 New
                    0
                    or just go to google again.
                    1. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 17 January 2018 05: 41 New
                      0
                      you can still here, you already agreed with that
                      https://topwar.ru/132860-lyuftvaffe-v-45-m-posled
                      nie-polety-i-proekty-prodolzhenie-chast-4.html # co
                      mment-id-7763612
                    2. Dooplet11
                      Dooplet11 18 January 2018 14: 53 New
                      0
                      Baltic Fleet could not test trophy aircraft. This is not his function. Go to Google and joke who and in what cases conducted tests for the Air Force and Navy Air Force. The Baltic Fleet will not be on the list of these organizations. He will not be on the list of organizations making decisions on the adoption of aircraft, including trophy ones.
                      1. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 18 January 2018 17: 37 New
                        0
                        Pilots experience what they fly on. While they are not forbidden to do this in order to avoid any questions why German planes are diving so well.
          4. Warrior2015
            Warrior2015 27 July 2018 19: 04 New
            +1
            Quote: NF68
            The real battles on the Soviet-German front were noticeably different from the "fights" at the testing institute. German pilots did not engage in maneuver battles in either the vertical or horizontal plane. Their fighters sought a surprise attack to bring down a Soviet aircraft, and then went into the clouds or on their territory. Attack aircraft also unexpectedly rained down on our ground forces. It was rare to intercept both those and others

            Yes, a very true description of the “backlash” tactics on the Eastern (for them) front.
            1. NF68
              NF68 27 July 2018 19: 59 New
              0
              Quote: Warrior2015
              Quote: NF68
              The real battles on the Soviet-German front were noticeably different from the "fights" at the testing institute. German pilots did not engage in maneuver battles in either the vertical or horizontal plane. Their fighters sought a surprise attack to bring down a Soviet aircraft, and then went into the clouds or on their territory. Attack aircraft also unexpectedly rained down on our ground forces. It was rare to intercept both those and others


              Yes, a very true description of the “backlash” tactics on the Eastern (for them) front.


              The Germans used this tactic not only on the Eastern Front. It started back in Spain and then the Germans also in the West. Only after Spain did the Germans perfect something. In the West, only Mustangs and Thunderbolts could catch Me-109 and FW-190 in a dive.
              1. Warrior2015
                Warrior2015 27 July 2018 22: 25 New
                0
                Quote: NF68
                The Germans used this tactic not only on the Eastern Front. It started back in Spain and then the Germans also in the West.

                Yes, I am aware of course, I just said that it was dominant at the VF. In ZF since 43, the tactics were different.

                And it seemed to me that the Lightning in the dive was very good - that's why in the Pacific they attacked the Japanese.
                1. NF68
                  NF68 29 July 2018 15: 52 New
                  0
                  Quote: Warrior2015
                  Quote: NF68
                  The Germans used this tactic not only on the Eastern Front. It started back in Spain and then the Germans also in the West.

                  Yes, I am aware of course, I just said that it was dominant at the VF. In ZF since 43, the tactics were different.


                  This is if you have to attack American bombers using specially developed fighters for this. They flew because of the additional armament and reservation not much better than the iron, and in the event of such an interceptor meeting with the American P-47 or P-51, there were too few chances to escape from them. And if they’re “pure fighters”: Me-109 G-6 with engines DB-605 AS, Me-109 G-10, Me-109 K-4 or FW-190 D-9, then they had chances on the Western Front dive away

                  And it seemed to me that the Lightning in the dive was very good - that's why in the Pacific they attacked the Japanese.


                  Almost all American fighters dived very well, plus powerful weapons and large ammunition. But still, a single-engine fighter is better than even such a maneuverable 2 engine fighter as the P-38.
                  1. Warrior2015
                    Warrior2015 29 July 2018 19: 22 New
                    +1
                    Quote: NF68
                    They flew because of the additional armament and reservation not much better than the iron, and in the event of such an interceptor meeting with the American P-47 or P-51, there were too few chances to escape from them.

                    In fact, the Germans tried to do combined tactics - light (but not fire resistant from the phalanx of fortresses and liberators) Messer fighters - to link an escort + an attack group of heavy and damage-resistant type Fw190 or Bf110 hits the bombers

                    .
                    Quote: NF68
                    Almost all American fighters dived very well, plus powerful weapons and large ammunition.

                    Powerful ammunition - but for weak weapons, machine guns are still much worse than guns.
                    1. NF68
                      NF68 29 July 2018 20: 08 New
                      0
                      Quote: Warrior2015
                      In fact, the Germans tried to do combined tactics - light (but not fire resistant from the phalanx of fortresses and liberators) Messer fighters - to link an escort + an attack group of heavy and damage-resistant type Fw190 or Bf110 hits the bombers


                      When it came to a real fight, who beat whom and how could.

                      Powerful ammunition - but for weak weapons, machine guns are still much worse than guns.


                      The Germans or Japanese still did not like these machine guns. Starting from the 1943 of the year when the Americans gradually “mastered” the airspace over Europe, German bombers did not meet them often, and for German fighters and heavy machine guns were enough. Do not forget that the Americans that over Europe, that in the Pacific Ocean acted at a great distance from their airfields and were in the air for many hours. In these conditions, a large ammunition load for 6-tee or 8-mi 12,7 mm. machine guns were preferable to significantly smaller ammunition for more powerful 20 mm. shells. And when an American fighter wholeheartedly fires out of 6-ty or 8-machine guns even on a relatively poorly developed enemy fighter, then the chances of getting into this fighter are quite high. and with regard to the correlation of forces, the Americans were usually in the majority.
                      1. Warrior2015
                        Warrior2015 30 July 2018 17: 34 New
                        +1
                        Quote: NF68
                        When it came to a real fight, they beat someone who could and how could
                        Conditions in each particular battle could be different, primarily depending on the behavior of escort groups.

                        Quote: NF68
                        The Germans or Japanese didn’t really like these machine guns anyway.
                        Well, probably you shouldn’t compare Japanese aircraft with German ones in terms of bulletproofness; at Deutsche everything was much more rational and more serious, in contrast to the "Zero" and other "Betty" zazhialok.

                        The Japanese only probably “Syden” were able to create exactly as a damage-resistant and well-armed fighter, but too late.
    2. Dalailama
      Dalailama 29 December 2017 21: 38 New
      +2
      This thing, following from the name and range, was rather not a PC, but a jet “Faust” Panzershrek modified for an airplane, which hit 150-200 meters on the ground. The panzerblitz also launched from the pipes were in the middle, closer to the R4M on the basis of which they were made. If such a hollow from afar on the engine as it was at the end of the article, then there will be misses.
  4. polpot
    polpot 29 December 2017 20: 18 New
    +5
    I always thought that postscripts were a Soviet invention, but reading about the military exploits of the German flyers, in March 1945, the idea appears that some hangover wrote reports of grand victories, the leadership sniffed cocaine and increased the number of victories every 10 times and talked about the victories of the Führer, he joyfully He believed how it ended May 9 everyone knows.
  5. VladGashek
    VladGashek 29 December 2017 20: 41 New
    +4
    The book is the eulogy of the Luftwaffe45. There is no adequate assessment of the use of these missiles by attack aircraft. How can a 100 meter guided missile hit a tank, given the speed of the aircraft. German pilots were probably aces.
    1. NF68
      NF68 29 December 2017 21: 54 New
      +2
      How can a 100-controlled rocket hit a tank, given the speed of the aircraft. German pilots were probably aces.


      Perhaps I did not quite understand exactly how these missiles were controlled. Apparently, all control was that the missiles flew in the direction in which they were launched and the deviation from this direction of flight at short distances was relatively small, which allowed us to hope to get into the tanks.
  6. LPD17
    LPD17 29 December 2017 22: 32 New
    +2
    ... they very much "complained" to the Faustists in their memoirs ...
    but on the flyers with blitz or something else .... did not meet ..
    and judging by the recollection of the most hated was the dive junkers
    apparently deservedly hated ...
  7. Dedall
    Dedall 29 December 2017 22: 44 New
    +5
    I would advise the author to download an IL-2 Battle for Stalingrad simulator to the computer and try to shoot missiles at the tank from 100 meters. True, there are only “silts” with the RS-85 and RS-132, but at such a distance there is no difference whether the missile is guided or not, all the more so on the “background”, the speed of which is greater and the maneuverability worse. As for my successes, it was better to set fire to tanks with cannon weapons. And I think that it is not in vain that Rudel recorded so many tanks at his own expense precisely with cannon containers.
    1. gerkost2012
      gerkost2012 29 December 2017 23: 44 New
      +9
      Record and really knock out, the essence is different! Soviet memoirs were full of writings about the heroism of an unnamed soldier, and even in the West and in Germany in particular, they wrote and wrote about the heroes of the Luftwaffe, which is simply stunned. Myths of Ancient Greece have a rest.
      The “lucky” Rudel on the U-87 is just a copy of the blond beast E Hartman. In the book Pilot Pieces, Rudel’s fable especially touches on how easily he escaped the attack of the La-5FN Guards Six in 1944. He sank almost to the grass and also forced to make a fighter, which was chasing him, then winding along the winding ravines, where Rudel flew in his "baptist". And in the end, La-5 crashed into some sort of slope. On such a powerful fighter as the La-5FN, the pilot would simply cut off his departure through the front line with a fire, and the second would catch this pterodactyl at the exit of the maneuver and knock it down. Why the hell to risk and chase this Yu-87 along ravines? But the Germans are not used to displaying Russian as idiots in these military fables. They so want to replay the war, even on paper, it’s not Berlin to take. It is only surprising when exactly the Russians repeat all these nonsense.
      1. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 30 December 2017 19: 18 New
        +2
        Not Russians repeat, liberals repeat.
      2. Dalailama
        Dalailama 1 January 2018 05: 57 New
        0
        This episode is described approximately also from the Soviet side.
        1. gerkost2012
          gerkost2012 2 January 2018 13: 55 New
          +1
          What "Soviet side"? Source to the studio! Or with the one that retells Rudel's nonsense, more precisely - writers from Germany.
          1. Dalailama
            Dalailama 2 January 2018 14: 12 New
            0
            For a source I need a long time in Google. From the description of the combat path of the unit (in the aircraft shot down by the tail gunner as). Both pursued such a priority goal, and not every aircraft had a walkie-talkie. Before that, they knocked out fighter cover or tied in battle. In the end, because of the excitement of the battle, alas, a bummer.
            1. gerkost2012
              gerkost2012 16 January 2018 10: 17 New
              0
              According to Rudel’s memoirs, this is the summer of 1944. Then the walkie-talkie, especially on La fighters, was installed necessarily !! The source of the description of such a “battle” is Rudel himself and you shouldn’t bother looking for something .. How does he paint his maneuvers between forests and ravines, his feelings and feelings and the arrow ... In short, this is not even fiction, it’s a saga about blond and one-legged knight for complete suckers.
              1. Dalailama
                Dalailama 17 January 2018 04: 42 New
                0
                you can strain and search, the domestic ones were unreliable and the radio was only at the commissariat, the rest had radio sets.
      3. fighter angel
        fighter angel 2 January 2018 21: 31 New
        +2
        I dare to assure you that this garbage called: "blond jerk of the Reich", "Moodle on the piece" and "I fought against the Stalinist falcons" - NO ONE ALREADY BELIEVES !!! And thank God! That time has passed!
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 2 January 2018 22: 21 New
          +1
          Everything was recorded at the rudel. In the infantry, the snipers were with that score. Compared to the Il-2, a dive pilot has little risk against anti-aircraft guns, and he was well covered from fighters.
          1. fighter angel
            fighter angel 3 January 2018 11: 59 New
            +2
            And what did the poodle register? Did he run after every take-off across the battlefield and our rear-counted out tanks? And somehow, at the same time, he determined "his" ??? Do not carry nonsense. Getting into a tank from 37-mm caliber cannons, which were mounted on the Yu-87 - still DOES NOT ABSOLUTELY MEAN HIS DAMAGE AND EXIT!
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 3 January 2018 23: 38 New
              +1
              When firing from guns, a tungsten projectile hit at a vulnerable point of the tank from a close range was recorded. The results of the use of bombs were also recorded by the tail arrow when exiting the dive.
              1. fighter angel
                fighter angel 4 January 2018 01: 21 New
                +1
                In this case, the tail gunner is NOT INDICATOR! He is an interested person, they are together with the pilot-commander of the crew! The shooter will say what his commander orders him to say. He is also more willing to fly in a “productive” carriage. Rewards, titles, holidays are additional. They did not convince here absolutely.
                Now about tungsten.
                When evaluating the anti-tank capabilities of the Luftwaffe, it is necessary to take into account the very limited capabilities of the German industry for the production of subcaliber shells of all types, mainly due to the lack of TUNGSTEN and MOLYBDEN and the extremely insufficient supply of combat air groups to them. Alloying materials in Germany were not enough even for the manufacture of tank armor. talk about the mass production of sub-caliber armor-piercing shells, including with tungsten cores and about mass combat use - Alas, DO NOT have to,
                1. fighter angel
                  fighter angel 4 January 2018 01: 38 New
                  +1
                  Now about the hit of tanks by various types of shells.
                  The standard armor-piercing projectile for VK 3.7 with 400 m at a meeting angle of 0- “took” only 40-mm armor and “thirty-four” of all types DO NOT AFFECT AT ATTACKS FROM ANY DIRECTION!
                  A sub-caliber projectile for VK 3.7 could penetrate the armor of the T-34-76 turret only when firing from a distance of not more than 180 m, and 40-mm side armor - no more than 400 m. However, the effective firing time was 1.3 seconds. and 4.4 seconds accordingly, since the minimum permissible maneuver height at the exit is 15–20 m, the ceasefire distance is 80–90 m. That is, only one shell could be effective. ONE APPLIANCE !!!
                  The defeat of the T-34-85 tank, which had enhanced armor, did not provide for an attack from the side with any shooting range! Hits in the overmotor armor and the roof of the tower - LIKE ANY DISTANCES GIVING CONTINUOUS RICOCHETS!
                  Estimates show that for a guaranteed defeat of ONE “THIRTY-FOUR-FOUR”, A REQUEST FOR FORCES OF 40-50 Yu-87G !!!
                  About the defeat of the heavy tanks KV, IS-1, IS-2, as well as artillery propelled guns at their base, AND THE SPEECH CAN NOT BE !!!
                  Everything is perfectly described in detail by Oleg Rastrenin, in his work: "Luftwaffe attack aircraft-myths and reality." Read.
                2. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 4 January 2018 02: 33 New
                  0
                  Besides a machine gun, he also has a camera.
                  American and Portuguese tungsten was enough for the Ju-87, the Panthers fired the same until the supply ceased, and the alterations into jagdpanthers. Divers took tanks to the roof. Those that were not diving dragged a 75mm gun, the same caliber as on the Panther.
                  1. fighter angel
                    fighter angel 4 January 2018 11: 56 New
                    +2
                    Absurd nonsense! What American tungsten, if from the 43rd all maritime transatlantic traffic was controlled by the Allies ??? And about the “Portuguese tungsten” after landing in Normandy and Italy’s withdrawal from the war, I didn’t have to forget about it. Absolutely. And these deliveries did not even cover the whole needs of Verhmacht even in the best years. Or do you think all the tungsten went to one poodle? He alone with his thing was supplied to them 100%? And all the rest, by the residual principle?
                    1. fighter angel
                      fighter angel 4 January 2018 12: 07 New
                      +3
                      Dalailam --- "Dive-bombers took tanks to the roof"

                      Research and the experience of the war shows the exact opposite. SUMMARY OF THE T-34-76, T-34-85 TANK TOWER ATTACHMENT AND ROOF ATTACHMENT AND ROOF, ANY RISKETS WERE ALLOWED FROM ANY DISTANCES. This concerns the VK 3.7 gun, which was located on the Yu-87.

                      Dalaylama is absolutely not versed in the Luftwaffe aircraft and does not even know the main types of attack aircraft. For him, they are classified as "diving" and "those that are not diving" .... Wouldn’t you be dishonored better, Dalaylama, and you would go first at least google ...
                      1. fighter angel
                        fighter angel 4 January 2018 12: 24 New
                        +1
                        Educational program for the Dalai Lama:
                        In the Luftwaffe there was such a twin-engine single-seat attack aircraft “Henschel” Ns-129, extremely inefficient, with unreliable engines “Gnom-Ron”, easy extraction of fighter jets. As long as the “German engineering genius” did not try to hang on it, it was mostly useless. So Hc-129 and remained a "suicide bomber" on the battlefield.
                        Now about the cannon - “like in Panther caliber” - you feel, Dalaylam, how terrible it becomes from this phrase ???
                        The 75 mm VK 7.5 gun was placed on the Henschel, BUT! The ammunition of this gun was FUNNY SMALL - TOTAL 12 Shells!
                        Test flights showed that the Hc-129 with such a "Suspension" is barely kept in the air! And the flight speed DOES NOT EXCEED 200-240 KM / H. Due to the large recoil when firing in the air, after the first shot, a POWERFUL PICKING MOMENT AND A BUMPING IN A LONG PLANE ARISED! There couldn’t be any speeches and speeches!
                        Well, and most importantly: In July-October 1944, the Germans released TOTAL 25 SUCH "WUNDER-STORM-ATTACK" and NO INFLUENCE ON THE WAY OF THE MILITARY ACTIONS THEY DOESN'T HAVE.
                    2. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 4 January 2018 20: 57 New
                      0
                      German submariners in the Atlantic had a schedule of ships that carried cargo to Germany. Shipping through Sweden and transit through Switzerland never stopped. Before circumcision of tungsten, the frontal Panther shot them. Only grab on the Ju-87 was later. When the escort began to miss them, they went FW-190 with NAR and rocket-propelled grenade launchers (what is the article about), before that with sliding bombs (this photo was in the previous one).
                      Put the T-34 on the side tests?
                      Guns of this caliber were placed not several types of aircraft, not only in the axis countries.
                      Why then did such Henschels release as many as 25 if it was possible to find out everything in one or two? Not a bigger suicide bomber than IL-2.
                      1. fighter angel
                        fighter angel 5 January 2018 12: 49 New
                        +2
                        And the German submariners did not have a train schedule from Lisbon to Berlin? At the same time, the Lufthansa flight schedule? Really was not ... How so ?! A flaw, and fatal !!!

                        And what, in the Atlantic, only the Germans grazed and drowned ships? Angels with amers sat idly by and watched tungsten swimming towards Hitler?
                        It will be known to the Dalayama that from the end of 42nd to the beginning of 43, allied submarines and aircraft operated quite effectively on sea lanes, which led to a decrease in the supply of strategic raw materials, including tungsten, by 40-50%. And this was only the beginning. Let me remind you, this is the beginning of the 43rd year. Further, everything increased in arithmetic progression.

                        And again, the Dalaylama ravings - “... Before the circumcision of tungsten, the frontal Panther shot them. Only Ju-87 grabbed it later ...”

                        That is, according to your statement, it turns out that for some time now tungsten shells went only to supply the Luftwaffe, namely the Yu-87, and specifically to the poodle-strudel strudel ... But what about the valiant “panzerwaffe" ??? They cheated completely? poor fritz tankers, no sub-caliber with tungsten, they gave everything to a poodle ...
                        Dalaylam froze garbage, however, not to get used to it ... Another.

                        Henschelles released 25 pieces, because very “Hans” wanted to use this “wunder-waffle”. But it turned out that even the most experienced pilots, of whom there were already a few in the 44th, CANNOT PILOT, EFFECTIVELY APPLY, NEVER GET IN SOVIET TANKES from this “flying mop” !!! There was a big "bummer" ...

                        Och.interestno-Dalaylama, and what other types of aircraft, and not only in the countries of the axis were placed guns of caliber-75 mm. ??? Please, open and supplement your previous statement ...
                    3. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 6 January 2018 00: 00 New
                      0
                      Under their own or neutral flag, the ships transported strategic raw materials to a neutral country and then they were resold by a Swiss train with raw materials for pansher chocolate or a Swedish steamer together with ore.
                      Panthers were then converted into jagdpanera under a steel shell, this was higher. Henschel could not be converted into jagdchenschel and he could not dive.
                      On Mosquito, on Me-262, Do-17, Me-410
                      1. fighter angel
                        fighter angel 6 January 2018 01: 16 New
                        +1
                        Dalaylama, you seem to be pretending to be a "hose" ???
                        Well, what kind of nonsense again? About the "ships under neutral flags" ???
                        Do you seriously consider allies as idiots?
                        In your opinion, they did not know this scheme? And they didn’t have intelligence intelligence?
                        How old are you? What "parallel reality" do you live in?
                        It will be known to you: ALL VESSELS UNDER NEUTRAL FLAGS MANDATORY BY ALLISTS WERE MONITORED AND CHECKED BY STOPPING AND SEARCHING BY SEARCH TEAM! Upon detection of "cargo" - acted at the discretion of the captain of the patrol ship. Either under escort to the nearest port, or- ON THE BOTTOM !!! If it is impossible to patrol and escort.

                        Why are you trying to "rub the glasses" here ???
                      2. fighter angel
                        fighter angel 6 January 2018 01: 35 New
                        +1
                        Dalaylama, why are you Lying?
                        And in the most BASED IMAGE ???
                        You had the misfortune to claim above that the 75 mm guns were set on other planes. They listed "Mosquito", Me-262, Do-17 and Me-410.
                        Now ATTENTION !!!

                        What is a 75 mm gun on a mosquito?
                        Only on the FB-18 variant did he have a 57-mm Vickers-S cannon.
                        NO 75-mm GUNS FOR MOSCOW WAS NOT !!!

                        Further. Me-262.
                        Only on three machines did they put a 50 mm VK 5 cannon.
                        ANY 75-mm GUN ON THE “SCUMBAL” Me-262 NOT SET !!!

                        Me-410.
                        Similarly, only VK 5, 50 mm caliber.
                        NO 75 mm GUNS on the Me-410 WAS NOT !!!

                        Do-17, as well as Do-217 - only 30-mm guns and 7.92-mm machine guns.
                        As you can see, there was also NO 75 mm GUN !!!

                        Why are you Lying, Dalaylam? For what purpose?

                        Special about the VK-5 gun -

                        - "... a 50 mm VK 5 gun, Soviet experts rightly considered it unsuccessful and ineffective in comparison with similar domestic samples:

                        “The VK 5-caliber gun of 50 mm, being a tank gun adapted for installation on an airplane, is of no interest, with the exception of the automatic electro-pneumatic reloading system. At a rate of fire of 40 rounds / min and an initial speed of about 500 m / s, the gun has a weight together with automatic reloading units of 592 kg, while the domestic NS-45 cannon of 45 mm caliber with a firing rate of 270 rounds / min and an initial speed of 795 m / s has a weight of 3,5 times less, that is 168 kg. 40 rounds / min practically ensures conducting aimed fire with only single shots ... "
                    4. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 6 January 2018 02: 17 New
                      +1
                      It seems that you seriously consider them as true allies. Everyone knew everything and openly wrote about it and spoke their interviews in newspapers like Truman. Inspections-inspections were in WWI when the coast of Germany in the North Sea and Gibraltar was blocked, and any goods with the destination of Spain, Turkey, Sweden or Switzerland were blocked, so what? And further from these countries it is resold to the Germans. For what purpose are you trying to deny this?
                      The caliber from 57mm further increased. For Mosquito, this was for example necessary because the 57mm power was not enough for attacks on shipping. The bow parts of the 75mm Messers are distinguished by a more developed fairing of the recoil device. About 30mm for the Do-17 especially amused. Such aircraft did not need a high rate of fire; they needed a large projectile power that destroyed the top bomber leader, the wreckage of which was taken by the rest of the bomber or dodged and broke the system, which made it easier to shoot down fighter planes with weapons.
                      1. fighter angel
                        fighter angel 6 January 2018 11: 42 New
                        +2
                        Dalaylama- LIAR, LIAR, REFERRATOR and FALSE!
                        STATEMENT FOR EVERYONE WITH A FULL BASIS!
                        Dalaylama IS CAPTED FOR AN INNOUS LIE !!!
                        Commentators, do not mess with Dalayama.
                        HE LIES AND PERFORMES FACTS !!!
                        Therefore, the conversation with him is over. Dodge further, as you like!
                        RUB YOURSELF, ELSE ANYWHERE IF IT GETS!
                    5. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 6 January 2018 19: 32 New
                      0
                      STOP HYSTERICO
                      Who should the Spaniards buy for themselves? The French? Or ride an entire war in carts? Are the Swiss raw materials for regular chocolate, which has already served as the raw material for the production of pansher chocolates?
                      The Ju-88 was still equipped with a 7,5cm PAK on the Eastern Front, but they were abandoned because the entire installation had to be reset to avoid fighter attacks.
                      There was nothing about you - the Ju-87 dive shoter could not dive, then nothing was spoiled with him.
                      1. fighter angel
                        fighter angel 7 January 2018 15: 33 New
                        0
                        Dalaylama- A BLUE LIHR, UNCONSCIOUS LIAR !!!
                        LET EVERYONE IN COMMENTS ABOUT THIS KNOW !!!
                        The conversation is over!
                        I HAVE NOTHING TO TALK ABOUT WITH LIARS !!!
                    6. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 8 January 2018 00: 05 New
                      0
                      No, Dalaylam is not lying. It’s someone here who ate the wrong chocolate and kukan vomits for the Rockefellers whose Truman and Hitlers (since 1942) were on a leash.
                      Quote: Harry S. Truman, 1941-06-24, The New York Times.
                      If we see that Germany wins, then we should help Russia, and if Russia will win, we should help Germany, and let them kill as much as possible.
                      1. fighter angel
                        fighter angel 9 January 2018 12: 57 New
                        0
                        He’s lying, Dalaylam, and NAGLO LIES !!!
                    7. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 9 January 2018 13: 09 New
                      0
                      There was no such interview with Mr. Truman in the New York Times, was there? Axis countries did not border on neutral? Reexport could not have a place to be?
              2. saigon
                saigon 4 January 2018 15: 15 New
                +3
                1 How many meters are the guns placed under the wings of the u-87?
                2 how far is the reduction of guns installed on s-87?
                3 At what speed does a piece fall onto the wing with a complete loss of control?
                4 When diving at an angle of 10-15 degrees, the shells go at the same angle and these are ricochets from armor
                5 the tail gunner could see the tank not standing side where the shells were sent, he flies his ass in front.
                6 Rudel bullshit and failed to master any type of aircraft other than Yu-87
                7 Rudel's nickname in the Luftwaffe was strudel (like an apple pie, not a gram of respect)
                So you can draw conclusions yourself.
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 4 January 2018 21: 02 New
                  0
                  Diving cannon Ju-87 was not less than at 60 degrees.
                  Sprudel (lemonade), he did not drink alcohol. He only mastered the U-87, but good.
                  With the diversity of accuracy and breaking through to youtube, there is video from both course recorders and the tail shooter.
                  1. saigon
                    saigon 5 January 2018 07: 23 New
                    +2
                    The same Rudel emphasized that the attack was carried out at an angle of 87-37 degrees on the Yu-10 with 20 mm cannons.
                    The date was set to one exactly fixed value of 200, or 300 meters there, and it was at this point that the shells of both guns fell.
                    the thing with two broads under the wing was very inert and the exact aiming at the target with these broads was extremely small.
                    Yu-87 is an excellent dive player and it is a dive player, not an attack aircraft.
                    So the mischief with 37 mm guns the Germans quickly abandoned.
                    1. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 5 January 2018 23: 57 New
                      0
                      Attack of what? Quickly - with surrender. From Kursk 1943 to February 1945 he flew on such a.
              3. gerkost2012
                gerkost2012 16 January 2018 10: 26 New
                0
                Do you know what to write? Did the rear shooter also determine if he thought he was knocked out? 455, 456,457 ... 522 ... Yes, Moodle himself in front of you is a kid from a nursery. The shooter, whether he is pieces or Ila, is obliged to monitor the air, up-to-left-to the right, and not to stare at the ground, counting the smokes and hits! Otherwise.
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 17 January 2018 04: 44 New
                  0
                  at the output of their dive, he or he and the recorder, then considered on films
      4. sd68
        sd68 3 January 2018 15: 17 New
        +1
        you do not quite correctly quote Rudel.
        “The pilot of La-5, who, in all probability, knows his job, sits on my tail, the others keep him at a short distance. Whatever I do, I can’t shake this La off.
        He partially released flaps to reduce speed. I fly into deep ravines to keep it lower and make it so that the danger of colliding with the ground would confuse his sight. But he holds on to me and his tracers pass very close to my cab.
        My gunner, Gaderman, shouts excitedly that the fighter will certainly bring us down.
        .
        In me, surprise begins to slowly build up, as this guy, coming from behind, can follow my turns on the fighter. Sweat runs down my forehead. I keep pulling the control knob over myself, tracers continue to sweep under my wing.
        .
        The other La ended the persecution, apparently expecting their colleague was about to knock us down. Flying in this style is too tough for them: almost vertical turns at an altitude of 10-15 meters above the ground. ... But here comes the loud cry of Gaderman: "La fell!"
        Did Gaderman bring down an enemy aircraft from his machine gun, or did the fighter spars not withstand the enormous tension during these turns at full speed? In the headphones I hear the loud screams of the Russians. They saw what happened and this is something out of the ordinary.
        The next morning the ground spotter of this sector calls and tells me how anxious he was watching yesterday’s performance and heartily congratulates me on behalf of the division.
        From the radio message intercepted last night, it becomes clear that the fighter pilot was the famous Soviet ace, twice Hero of the Soviet Union .... "
        In this situation, Rudel does not expose the Soviet pilot as an idiot at all, on the contrary, writes about his skill, and considers his salvation an accident ...
        1. fighter angel
          fighter angel 4 January 2018 01: 50 New
          +2
          SD68 - Yes, and to hell with this poodle-poodle, he’s a nonsense, you don’t expose yourself as an idiot at least ... "La fell" ... "Spars could not stand the turn" ... "ground spotter called" ... "moreover, the next day" ... and why not on the same day? Do you know the speeds? U-87 and La-5? Vertical bends at an altitude of 15-20 m. Moreover, on the Yu-87 they are “tough”, and “Lavochkin” for some reason is “too tough” ... DIRT FULL !!! Do not disgrace another time, do not quote this bullshit. You’ll be laughed at!
          1. Dalailama
            Dalailama 4 January 2018 02: 34 New
            0
            If the flaps let out then vryatli business in the side members.
          2. sd68
            sd68 6 January 2018 03: 23 New
            0
            no need to get so excited, drink a sedative or something.
            it is clear that this is primarily an artistic description, like most memoirs.
            I wrote about this
            he easily escaped the attack of the Guards Six .... But, the Germans are not used to displaying Russian idiots in these military fables.


            In fact, he does not write that it was easy, on the contrary, emphasizes that he miraculously left by coincidence, and speaks very respectfully of the Soviet pilot.
            What I noticed. So do you understand?
            PS and you yourself do not know why 68?
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. fighter angel
              fighter angel 9 January 2018 13: 05 New
              0
              Apparently, this episode touches you - "Moodle respectfully spoke about the Soviet pilot."
              What an "Aryan nobility", what a "worthy adversary." Has descended, well it is necessary !!!
              Right stingy tear rolls up ... And as soon as they managed to defeat such?
              PS I’m not going to solve puzzles.
              Let 68, the main thing is not 69 ...
        2. gerkost2012
          gerkost2012 16 January 2018 10: 33 New
          0
          It is an idiot that he exposes the pilot of LA. Note that this is emphasized, they say - twice GSS! Who it? And as such, the GSS could be so stupid, chasing ravines? All this is easily verified. We find pilots of the WWII fighter — twice the GSS, on which it flew, the date and place of death, and as a result ... Nobody chased Rudel along the ravines. Myths and legends, that is nonsense for decoration.
          1. Dalailama
            Dalailama 22 January 2018 10: 33 New
            0
            you can google just gss
  8. shuravi
    shuravi 30 December 2017 01: 18 New
    +3
    From 100 meters even from a helicopter can not be allowed.
    1. LeonidL
      LeonidL 30 December 2017 05: 26 New
      +1
      Absolutely accurately noticed - but ... just not from the freeze mode. Then you can ATGM and NURS even as on a simulator ... but who in battle will allow you this?
      1. shuravi
        shuravi 30 December 2017 11: 09 New
        +3
        Yes, even at the training ground. 100 meters, it is guaranteed to own fragments to catch.
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 30 December 2017 17: 05 New
          0
          For them, as the article says, an unexpected nuisance was only the immediate explosions of the tank ammunition.
        2. Dalailama
          Dalailama 30 December 2017 18: 50 New
          0
          In other cases, the cumulative burns a small hole in the tank and the effect to the side and back of the explosion is insignificant for the aircraft.
          1. shuravi
            shuravi 30 December 2017 20: 06 New
            +2
            Cumulative ammunition also gives the expansion of fragments in all directions. And 100 meters, this is a guaranteed zone.
            Well, to work from such a distance in the SC is almost impossible. Even at a speed of 200 m / s there is not enough time. And if also with a dive, then easily pick up a complete rum of land.
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 30 December 2017 21: 48 New
              0
              On the ground reactive Pantsershrek shield was not to get gas. Faust was not there because the grenade was without taxiway.
            2. Dalailama
              Dalailama 3 January 2018 04: 54 New
              +1
              200m / s is 720km / h, at 800km / h it was about the unsuccessful use of the NAR Panzerblitz from afar, from grenade launchers near and at a lower speed, unless a semi-automatic launch system was used, such as on the later Me-163s firing bombs at the passage from below.
    2. Dalailama
      Dalailama 30 December 2017 05: 32 New
      +1
      over the target passed on a shaver firing from underwing rocket-propelled grenade launchers
  9. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 30 December 2017 19: 16 New
    +1
    [/ quote] Since the summer of 1944, the Luftwaffe High Command has increasingly begun to deploy anti-tank missiles stabilized with wires. [quote]
    Like this? Are wires hanging from the back instead of stabilizers? Indeed Wunderwaffe
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 31 December 2017 23: 03 New
      0
      Here are the simple panzerfausts at Bukker
      http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tJGmx5MtxIE/UB1QuREYbOI
      /AAAAAAAAGhs/mkdasqs5zWU/s1600/bu181.jpg

      Here is a simple R4M and cumulative long-range Panzerblitz at its base
      http://www.mundohistoria.org/sites/default/files/
      users / user996 / r4m_006.jpg

      Here are the Panzer Shreki under the wing of the FW-190 and panzerblitz (the pipes for panzerblitz were usually shorter)
      http://www.luftarchiv.de/flugkorper/rohr.jpg
      https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/fhsw/images/1
      /11/Fw_190_F-8_Panzerschreck.jpg

      Here is a ground panzer shrek (showing its loading with a rocket propelled grenade)
      https://verschwiegenegeschichtedrittesreich.files
      .wordpress.com / 2017/11 / italien-kampf-um-monte-cas
      sino-panzergrenadiere-der-wehrmacht-mit-88cm-panz
      erschreck.jpg

      Here is the reagent.
      https://forum.warthunder.com/uploads/monthly_2016
      _12/585d0b59da012_InnenansichteinesGefechtskopfes
      derPanzerschreck.jpg.22d2e66a44b83cb428733c69cab9
      e356.jpg

      Here are the panzerfausts on Cessna (also Bücker), like the installation of a Lewis machine gun, for night ones:
      http://i32.servimg.com/u/f32/12/32/28/62/g5110.jp
      g

      Here is something possibly wire-driven:
      http://www.luft46.com/missile/x4-14.jpg
    2. Dalailama
      Dalailama 1 January 2018 00: 48 New
      0
      But in this case, with the wires, the translator's pad, in the original it is written "stabilized by rotation" (drallstabilisierte), just in German it is a bit similar in spelling (to draht). I sent him a PS.
  10. shuravi
    shuravi 30 December 2017 20: 15 New
    +2
    The only WWII aviation weapon capable of effectively fighting tanks was the PTAB, alas, everything else.
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 30 December 2017 21: 45 New
      +1
      So the USSR did not have rocket-propelled grenade launchers, and the Anglo-Americans, with their disadvantages, failed again. Superbaza appeared only in Korea.
      1. shuravi
        shuravi 30 December 2017 23: 08 New
        0
        We are talking about weapons allowing for a hit to hit one tank.
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 30 December 2017 23: 55 New
          0
          Beautifully from 15sq.m on paper. The Germans also had their PTAB SD 4 HL in columns, Pantsershrek was more effective, it came out cheaper, and the pilot did not take such a risk.
          1. shuravi
            shuravi 31 December 2017 00: 21 New
            +2
            A bottle of Molotov cocktail is even cheaper. But what a misfortune, “Panzer Shrek”, this is already close combat, one hundred meters. And before you get the tank, he already has time to make trouble.
            But to take out on the march, in the rear, until I got to the battle, is a completely different matter.
            And it could just be aviation. By the way, the German PTABs were not so effective. And there were no suitable carriers.
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 31 December 2017 00: 54 New
              0
              If the field with him to go to full growth. He did not even have time to make a sudden stop that helped before that. Why was the FW-190 as an attack aircraft not a suitable carrier?
              1. shuravi
                shuravi 31 December 2017 14: 20 New
                +1
                1. Panzer Shrek is effective if tanks without infantry operate. Well, sometimes in urban battles. But the Red Army also learned to fight.
                2. FW-190 is IB. Aircraft for a completely different tactic.
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 31 December 2017 14: 29 New
                  0
                  Why then do we need grenade launchers in general? RPG-2, 7 (which first surpassed it), etc.
                  This is a single aircraft, in addition to information security, it was also in the form of an interceptor and attack aircraft.
                  1. shuravi
                    shuravi 31 December 2017 19: 22 New
                    0
                    From horizontal flight.
                    1. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 31 December 2017 19: 44 New
                      0
                      Like the Il-2, he was not a dive player.
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 1 January 2018 14: 03 New
                        0
                        And that, from a gentle dive (to 30 *) worked perfectly.
                    2. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 31 December 2017 23: 59 New
                      +1
                      The Ju-52 D used to be brought and not one by one, just not every pilot could control them, the FW-190 was practically everyone, and it was very difficult to intercept them.
                    3. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 1 January 2018 20: 09 New
                      +1
                      PTABs with horizontal flight above could use all types of aircraft. He couldn’t use cannons on tanks, not even particularly on armored personnel carriers
                      Linkov on the photo of aircraft with grenade launchers yesterday added higher here, a great comment.
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 3 January 2018 11: 59 New
                        0
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        PTABs with horizontal flight above could use all types of aircraft.


                        But only IL-2 moss enter the range of small arms.

                        He couldn’t use cannons on tanks, not even particularly on armored personnel carriers


                        Why all of a sudden? There was a cannon version of the IL-2. But guns and stuff are not as effective as PTAB.

                        Linkov on the photo of aircraft with grenade launchers yesterday added higher here, a great comment.


                        Easier installation of guns, but worse than PTAB.
                    4. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 3 January 2018 23: 42 New
                      0
                      FW-190 in the assault modification could also. What is the big point for applying PTAB to enter this zone? The caliber of the guns in the IL-2 was not the same or that. hit in the roof what was done only Ju-87D with a dive. Late Henschel took 75mm on board.
                      If they were in the roof and not on board. PTABs were designed to be dropped from 200 meters, but they had to be used in the same run with guns from 25-30
                      Prior to the use of grenade launchers and NAR, the Germans, along with their PTABs, also used torpedo bombs (in later versions with a jet engine). But there was a large percentage of misses due to uneven ground (funnels). A photo of one of them is in the third part.
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 4 January 2018 00: 20 New
                        +1
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        What is the big point for applying PTAB to enter this zone?


                        In order to obtain optimal dispersion of ammunition.

                        The caliber of guns in the Il-Xnumx was not the same


                        In addition to the SHVAK 2 mm and VYA-20, and 23 mm guns, IL-37 were installed. But in the end, the PTAB turned out to be an order of magnitude better as an anti-tank weapon.

                        or db hit in the roof what was done only Ju-87D with a dive. Later Henschel took on board 75mm.


                        See above.

                        If they were in the roof and not on board. PTABs were designed to be dropped from 200 meters, but they had to be used in the same run with guns from 25-30


                        What nonsense?

                        Prior to the use of grenade launchers and NAR, the Germans, along with their PTABs, also used torpedo bombs (in later versions with a jet engine). But there was a large percentage of misses due to uneven ground (funnels). A photo of one of them is in the third part.


                        The Germans did not create a normal PTAB, and the ersatz did not give the desired effect.
                    5. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 4 January 2018 00: 43 New
                      +1
                      Optimum dispersion can be achieved differently.
                      You can’t do anything to the tank from the 37mm cannon, just to the roof, for this you need a steep dive.
                      This is not bullshit, it's true. Mortgaged at 200. Then it was recommended to use all the weapons on Ilah in one pass.
                      What could be the main difficulty in creating (or copying) the PTAB? They for Ilov tanks gave at least some effect.
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 4 January 2018 23: 01 New
                        0
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        Optimum dispersion can be achieved differently.


                        So what about?

                        You can’t do anything to the tank from the 37mm cannon, just to the roof, for this you need a steep dive.


                        You are clearly a theoretical aviator. You can get into the tank roof completely from a hollow dive. The whole question is that you still have to get into the tank.

                        This is not bullshit, it's true. Mortgaged on 200.


                        I about it:
                        however, they had to be used in one run with guns with 25-30

                        Firstly, it is impossible to use all weapons in one run purely technically.
                        Secondly, the PTAB is the main anti-tank weaponry, which means that when approaching the target, a calculation will be built for it whenever possible.

                        Then it was recommended to use all the weapons on Ilah in one pass.


                        It's a bullshit.

                        What could be the main difficulty in creating (or copying) the PTAB?


                        As far as I remember, they were created on the bazza of an obsolete cluster bomb and did not achieve effective dispersion.

                        They for Ilov tanks gave at least some effect.


                        Deuce. PTAB, this is the only WWII weapon capable of working effectively against tanks.
                      2. The comment was deleted.
                    6. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 5 January 2018 02: 07 New
                      0
                      Quote: shuravi
                      You can get into the tank roof completely from a hollow dive. The whole question is that you still have to get into the tank.

                      The whole question is that you also need to break through.
                      Quote: shuravi
                      Firstly, it is impossible to use all weapons in one run purely technically.

                      The fire from the guns ceased for 200 meters, then immediately drop the PTAB. Google it.
                      Quote: shuravi
                      As far as I remember, they were created on the bazza of an obsolete cluster bomb and did not achieve effective dispersion.

                      Then why didn’t they achieve the same dispersion on the assault FW-190 as on the IL-2 with the same rash? An example was almost 2 years before the eyes.
                      Quote: shuravi

                      PTAB, this is the only WWII weapon capable of working effectively against tanks.

                      The only Soviet and far from as effective as the dive. Why is now individual guidance used for anti-roof submunitions?
                      IL-2 was not terrible PTAB and the same discharge of the ampoule combustible mixture.
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 8 January 2018 22: 03 New
                        0
                        Quote: DalaiLama

                        The whole question is that you also need to break through.


                        And what is the problem of breaking through the upper armor of the same Panzer IV for the VYA-23 cannon shell?


                        The fire from the guns ceased for 200 meters, then immediately drop the PTAB. Google it.


                        Kid, on the Internet, like on a fence, they write a lot of things.
                        But in reality I know what the so-called integrated use of TSA in one call is. On Mi-24, that is, in conditions similar to IL-2 and for similar goals. So, after working from SPV, there’s nothing else to work out, there’s no time for either arms manipulation or aiming. This is the time.
                        There is a clear priority for the work of aviation weapons. Bombs, RS, small arms. If the combat charge includes bombs, then they will be used in the first (first calls), with the highest possible efficiency. because there will be no distraction for any other shooting. These are two.

                        Then why didn’t they achieve the same dispersion on the assault FW-190 as on the IL-2 with the same rash? An example was almost 2 years before the eyes.


                        The Germans had many examples and far from all used.


                        The only Soviet and far from as effective as the dive.


                        After this phrase, further conversation with you makes no sense. For now you have recognized that it is an absolute amateur in matters of aviation. For the ignorant only, dive bombing is something particularly accurate. In fact, this is only a way to increase the accuracy of bombing with medium heights. Since the dispersion ellipse tends to circle, thereby reducing the magnitude of the range spread. Moreover, the dispersion itself does not disappear anywhere, even in calm conditions of a standard atmosphere. There are no identical bombs in mass production, which means that technical dispersion is inevitable. And from a height of the order of 1000-800 meters (it will not work below), it’s not like hatching, if you get into the tank, it’s by chance. And the weaving that fell 10 meters from the T-34 is nothing.
                        More accurate bombing from a gentle dive and low altitudes, the most accurate, with GP and PMV.

                        Why is now individual guidance used for anti-roof submunitions?


                        Because now there is a technical opportunity to create managed TSAs.


                        IL-2 was not terrible PTAB and the same discharge of the ampoule combustible mixture.


                        IL-2 was scary because it could work from small and extremely small heights, as well as quite large weapon systems.
                    7. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 6 January 2018 00: 03 New
                      0
                      The questions above seemed to hang.
                    8. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 9 January 2018 02: 13 New
                      0
                      Quote: shuarvi
                      And what a problem

                      Ricochet, not breaking. 20mm Ju-87 was not enough even with a dive, so they put 37mm, not 23mm on it.
                      Quote: shuravi
                      On the Mi-24, that is, in similar to the IL-2

                      Aiming was no longer necessary, the attack aircraft was already on course when firing from cannons, and PTAB areal. In real life, everything was in one go and at least they crippled the chassis of the tanks. Because with 200 scattering was ineffective as was the orientation of SBPs at low altitudes.
                      Quote: shuravi
                      The Germans had many examples and far from all used.

                      This is not serious. What other examples were there?
                      Quote: shuravi
                      In fact

                      It was not required to hit a tank with a bomb, 500-1000kg put it out of action by falling nearby. Then a round of the tank and the destruction of the crew of three machine guns. When attacking anti-tank artillery, smaller bombs were quietly placed between the gun stands. It starts of course with an average height but the most accurate at 80 degrees when the height quickly ends. They switched to cannons because the tanks became heavier and began to use the bombs on the course and a sudden stop before dropping the Ju-87 bombs or while the bomb was on its way.
                      Quote: shuravi
                      Because now there is a technical opportunity to create managed TSAs.

                      If everything was so good in the Second World War with uncontrollable, then this is completely unnecessary, especially given the possible interference.
                      Quote: shuravi
                      IL-2

                      The most effective on it was precisely the ampoule of the HS. The effectiveness of the PTAB was overestimated every 10 times. The attack aircraft more often went astray in a second approach than achieved something.
                      The Germans in books write that they achieved effective dispersal, but did not use it so that this effective method would not be known and would be immediately used against their heavy tanks and self-propelled guns.
                      Quote: shuravi
                      More accurate bombing from a gentle dive and low altitudes, the most accurate, with GP and PMV.

                      What to do with the fact that with a large horizontal speed of rounding, the scattering ellipse does not occur?
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 9 January 2018 10: 47 New
                        +1
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        Ricochet, not breaking. 20mm Ju-87 was not enough even with a dive, so they put 37mm, not 23mm on it.


                        Penetration is not only a caliber, PTR with 14,5 took up to 30 mm. And the VN cannon used 23 x 152 mm shells. Despite the fact that the top load on the “four” 20 mm did not.

                        Aiming was no longer necessary, the attack aircraft was already on course when firing from cannons, and PTAB areal. In real life, everything was in one go and at least they crippled the chassis of the tanks. Because with 200 scattering was ineffective as was the orientation of SBPs at low altitudes.



                        Again, you have babble and a meaningless set of words.
                        Write it on your forehead, the most powerful weaponry is applied first. And after firing from SPV, it’s not enough to even drop bombs into the target area, not to drop precisely.


                        This is not serious. What other examples were there?


                        Have you decided to teach me seriousness?


                        It was not required to hit a tank with a bomb, 500-1000kg incapacitated it by hitting it nearby.


                        Is everything all right with your head? Only a madhouse patient can work with a similar caliber against tanks. Well and still, when there is nothing more. Do you even know what is the radius of dispersion of fragments from these ammunition, what is the minimum drop height?
                        So getting close to the tank is already a success.

                        Then a round of the tank and the destruction of the crew of three machine guns


                        And when the cartridges in machine guns run out, the net is nearby and open fire from pistols. laughing

                        When attacking anti-tank artillery, smaller bombs were quietly placed between the gun stands. It starts of course with an average height but the most accurate on an 80 city when the height quickly ends.


                        Forgot another attack on the riders, carts to mention. laughing

                        They switched to guns because the tanks became heavier and began to use the bombs on the course and suddenly stop before dropping the Ju-87 bombs or while the bomb was on its way.


                        I will disappoint you. Lighter tanks are easier to maneuver. And the cannon "thing" is the last attempt to squeeze something out of an obsolete aircraft. The Germans have already lost absolute dominance in the air and could not bomb with impunity from above. I had to huddle on the ground. However, the cannon version was miserable. They had no effect on the course of the database.

                        If everything was so good in the Second World War with uncontrollable, then this is completely unnecessary, especially given the possible interference.



                        Are you anyhow fart something?

                        The most effective on it was precisely the ampoule of the HS. The effectiveness of PTAB was overestimated once in 10.


                        It only seems to you through ignorance.

                        The attack aircraft more often went astray in a second approach than achieved something.


                        Because PTAB was used in the first run.


                        The Germans in books write that they achieved effective dispersal, but did not use it so that this effective method would not be known and would be immediately used against their heavy tanks and self-propelled guns.


                        Whining beaten does not matter.


                        What to do with the fact that with a large horizontal speed of rounding, the scattering ellipse does not occur?


                        You are clearly far from the practice of bombing.
                        At extremely low altitudes, there is practically no lateral deviation. A range dispersion due to the same height is negligible.
                    9. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 9 January 2018 13: 13 New
                      0
                      With the angle of the projectile’s meeting with the roof armor (projectile hitting it) without a sharp dive, how?
                      Make a note of yourself that there was a failure with the PTAB in the roof, you did not find such a height for the IL-2 where they would have time to disperse normally and at the same time have time to navigate. Therefore, they were thrown aboard at low span after firing from cannons. Your picture is just PTAB on board, only breaks are not from them.
                      You have not answered.
                      They were in order with intelligence, and worked until the tankers learned how to escape from the attack. Tank commanders tried to shoot back from the pistols, while the rest did not even have them at first.
                      No luck, the dive tool is accurate, then it dives. The USSR did not do this, considering it simple and outdated even before the war. He did not even clean the chassis.
                      Range scattering at small is approximately the same due to the same horizontal speed, it gives the ellipse eccentricity.
                      With cannons squeezing to the ground you will not dive. They rejected the dive-bombers (those with whom they were) only when normal NAR and UR appeared, with computerization generally switched to cabling.
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 9 January 2018 22: 18 New
                        +1
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        With the angle of the projectile’s meeting with the roof armor (projectile hitting it) without a sharp dive, how?

                        No problem punching 10-20 mm armor at an angle 30 * from the VY gun.
                        And the fact that IL-2 could not bomb from a dive more than 40 * does not mean that he could not dive at all.

                        Make a note of yourself that there was a failure with PTAB in the roof,


                        Excuse me, are you a stupid person? Sorry, but a normal person being a teapot will not broadcast such things to an anti-tank specialization pilot.

                        did not find such a height for the IL-2 where they would have time to disperse normally and at the same time have time to navigate.


                        Do you have hallucinations?

                        Therefore, they were thrown aboard at low span after firing from cannons.


                        In your phaetasias.

                        Your picture is just PTAB on board, only breaks are not from them.


                        There are a lot of PTAB hits, you are not an expert, because your words are zilch.

                        You have not answered.


                        For what? Why didn't the Germans copy the PTAB? Yes, I somehow do not care, the main thing is that during WWII it was the most effective PT drug.

                        They were in order with intelligence, and worked until the tankers learned how to escape from the attack. Tank commanders tried to shoot back from the pistols, while the rest did not even have them at first.


                        They forgot about the cavalry.


                        No luck, the dive tool is accurate, then it dives. The USSR did not do this, considering it simple and outdated even before the war. He did not even clean the chassis.


                        What the hell is it exact if the minimum dump height is 800 m?
                        And to hit point targets with a freely falling bomb is effectively impossible even now. Otherwise, no ATGM would be invented.


                        Range scattering at small is approximately the same due to the same horizontal speed, it gives the ellipse eccentricity.


                        Trying to cover ignorance in terms?


                        With cannons squeezing to the ground you will not dive. They rejected the dive-bombers (those with whom they were) only when normal NAR and UR appeared, with computerization generally switched to cabling.


                        And what were the UD during WWII?
                    10. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 10 January 2018 02: 20 New
                      0
                      Generally should be. By the way, what was the area of ​​this tower roof, especially in the projection in 30 city?
                      You just don’t know what a dive is.
                      The pilot who used the PTAB on the Il-Xnumx with a pass over the target?
                      Hits but not breaks. Running gear damaged by them.
                      The only one that somehow gives a result on IL-2. The most effective aircraft was the cannon Ju-87D / G.
                      Do not care is not the answer. If the PTAB was the most effective, then they copied how the 120mm mortar was copied, all the same, they invented a cumulative charge from them, and rashing from a plane even in bulk from bomb bombs is easy.
                      The cavalry had personal weapons.
                      So accurate because dive. The discharge was usually at the height of 450.
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 11 January 2018 08: 42 New
                        +1
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        Generally should be.


                        Wrong.

                        By the way, what was the area of ​​this tower roof, especially in the projection in 30 city?


                        It’s quite enough.

                        You just don’t know what a dive is.


                        There are simply various ways of bombing. From GP, from dive, from steep dive, from cabrio. The advantages and disadvantages of each I studied at the school.
                        So, with all the advantages, steep dive bombing has strong limitations on the height of the drop. Which greatly reduces all its advantages and most importantly accuracy. You just do not know.

                        The pilot who used the PTAB on the Il-Xnumx with a pass over the target?


                        Do you think other methods of bombing do not require passage over the target?

                        Hits but not breaks. Running gear damaged by them.


                        You just don’t know how a cumulative charge pierces armor.

                        The only one that somehow gives a result on IL-2.


                        PTAB it was the best PT aircraft for the entire WWII.

                        The most effective aircraft was the cannon Ju-87D / G.


                        Baby talk.
                        First of all, the gun itself is not the best solution against tanks.
                        Secondly, Ju-87D / G, as a shitty carrier, due to significant parallax.
                        Third, how much was Ju-87D / G made? Something about two hundred pieces? A strange series for the "best" weapon.

                        Do not care is not the answer. If the PTAB was the most effective, then they copied how the 120mm mortar was copied, all the same, they invented a cumulative charge from them, and rashing from a plane even in bulk from bomb bombs is easy.


                        This does not negate the high efficiency of PTAB.


                        So accurate because dive. The discharge was usually at the height of 450.


                        Yes Yes. The same FAB-100 scatter of 1000 fragments. And you also need a reserve of height for the output from the dive. Do not tell tales.
                      2. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 11 January 2018 13: 13 New
                        0
                        Generally should be. By the way, what was the area of ​​this tower roof, especially in the projection in 30 city?
                        You just don’t know what a dive is.
                        The pilot who used the PTAB on the Il-Xnumx with a pass over the target?
                        Hits but not breaks. Running gear damaged by them.
                        The only one that somehow gives a result on IL-2. The most effective aircraft was the cannon Ju-87D / G.

                        What is the allowable diving angle of the Ju-87D / G?
                        Do not care is not the answer. If the PTAB was the most effective, then they copied how the 120mm mortar was copied, all the same, they invented a cumulative charge from them, and rashing from a plane even in bulk from bomb bombs is easy.

                        Failed! Googled in your favorite Google history of the German development of cumulative bombs.
                        Your revelations deserve the Shnobel Prize !!!
                      3. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 11 January 2018 14: 32 New
                        0
                        Quote: Dooplet11
                        Couldn't!

                        what could not? pour out bombs?
                    11. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 11 January 2018 11: 35 New
                      0
                      That is, they did not teach there that the accuracy during bombing from an airplane is the highest since a steep dive?
                      In your previous comments it was written that such a passage over the target on the Mi-24 was once.
                      Was the wing parallax on the Il-2 less? The best was a cannon dive. Normally dived, while ensuring the optimal angle of the projectile with the weakest point of the tank. See Rudel, video of defeats with all parallaxes on YouTube. Released 200pcs Ju-87G, still remade from the Ju-87D. Not every pilot was planted on the cannon but they knocked out a lot. When diving immediately after a single bombardment, an automatic rifled from it, it was psychologically easier to shoot.
                      50kg should also give more than lemon. Just read the application on the wiki. Type in Google how suddenly from a dark funnel after all who could get into it got out a tank.
                      She did not have high effectiveness. About the "magnificent" PTAB + IL-2 is it from the school, or learned from the Internet after the restructuring? IL-2 was released by 36000 because it suffered terrible losses. PTAB with IL-2 on board is why Ilyushin still did not go under execution. This constructor pinched all alternative solutions, at the end of the war in general with the wording "Why? Are we winning, anyway?"
                      Still, where is the answer about the Germans, to:
                      Quote: DalaiLama
                      they invented a cumulative charge, and rashing from a plane even in bulk from bomb bombs is easy.
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 11 January 2018 12: 43 New
                        0
                        The best was a cannon dive. Normally dived, while ensuring the optimal angle of the projectile with the weakest point of the tank. See Rudel, video of defeats with all parallaxes on YouTube. 200pcs Ju-87G were released, they were also remade from Ju-87D. Not every pilot was planted on the cannon but they knocked out a lot. When diving immediately after a single bombardment, an automatic rifled from it, it was psychologically easier to shoot.

                        Google the permissible diving angle for Ju-87G, then talk about the cannon-dive gunner optimal projectile angles of the projectile with the weakest point of the tank (by the way, what is this place?). They beat a lot, how much? Who counted? Where did the numbers go?
                        Type in Google how suddenly from a dark funnel after all who could get into it got out a tank.

                        In Google, you can also read how a vampire gets out of the grave in a village cemetery and draws blood from the entire village. Believe Google?
                        She did not have high effectiveness. About the "magnificent" PTAB + IL-2 is it from the school, or learned from the Internet after the restructuring? IL-2 was released by 36000 because it suffered terrible losses. PTAB with IL-2 on board is why Ilyushin still did not go under execution. This constructor pinched all alternative solutions, at the end of the war in general with the wording "Why? Are we winning, anyway?"

                        Did Google imprint this hash on your subcortex?
                      2. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 11 January 2018 14: 36 New
                        0
                        In the first paragraph, google, then in the second Google can not be trusted.
                        Go with your demagogy back to
                        https://topwar.ru/131954-kobry-v-zasade.html
                        Do not bother to communicate with the officer.
                      3. shuravi
                        shuravi 11 January 2018 20: 25 New
                        +2
                        [quote = DalaiLama] That is, they didn’t teach that the accuracy of bombing from an airplane is the highest since steep diving? [/ quote]

                        Boy, do not try to refute the BPSP course with your nonsense. The highest precision. this is when using assault bombs.

                        [quote] In your previous comments it was written that there was such a passage over the target on Mi-24 once. [/ quote]

                        You can quote it, there is clearly not what you are talking about.

                        [quote] Wing parallax on IL-2 was less? [/ quote]

                        Slightly less. Nevertheless, it is precisely because of this that the option with 37 mm was not further developed.

                        [quote] The best was a cannon dive. [/ quote]

                        Like a goal. Knocking him down was pretty easy.

                        [quote] Normally dived, while ensuring the optimal angle of the projectile with the weakest point of the tank. See Rudel, video of defeats with all parallaxes on YouTube. [/ Quote]


                        [quote] Released 200pcs Ju-87G, still reworked from Ju-87D. [/ quote]

                        This is negligible.
                        [quote] Not every pilot was planted on the cannon, but they beat out a lot [/ quote]

                        Well, maybe in your fantasies.
                        [quote] When diving immediately after a one-time bombardment, an automatic machine was withdrawn from it, it was psychologically easier to shoot. [/ quote]

                        How difficult it is for children to talk to you. What is the expansion of fragments do not know. what is drawdown too. But you have a nonsense carriage.

                        [quote] 50kg should also give more expansion than a lemon. Just read the application on the wiki. [/ quote]

                        Boy, I used AB, including before FAB-250, unlike you, I don’t need to contact the wiki.

                        [quote] Type in google how suddenly from a dark funnel after all who could get into it got out a tank. [/ quote]

                        I'm not interested in fairy tales.

                        [quote] She did not have high efficiency. About the "magnificent" PTAB + IL-2 is it from the school, or learned from the Internet after the restructuring? [/ quote]

                        This is only your blah blah of ignorance.

                        [quote] IL-2 was released by 36000 because it suffered terrible losses. [/ quote]

                        All suffered losses. But mass produced the best.


                        [quote] PTAB with IL-2 aboard is why Ilyushin still did not go under execution. This constructor pinched all alternative solutions, at the end of the war in general, with the wording “Why? Are we winning, anyway?” [/ Quote]

                        Another fantasy?


                        [quote] Still, where is the answer about the Germans, to: [quote = DalaiLama] they invented a cumulative charge, and rashing from a plane even in bulk from bomb bombs is simple. [/ quote]

                        However, they could not.
                    12. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 12 January 2018 07: 16 New
                      0
                      To refute the real effectiveness of the Ju-87 that inflicted heavy losses on the USSR with a BPSP course written by a school in which the dive-pilot never had it more than just cynicism squared.
                      Well, you probably should remember how it was with your neighbors. This is because the passage over the Mi-24 target was not applied in your own words. It was used on IL-2 (and there was a time for discharge), but as usual without changing the altitude and speed of this aircraft with all that it implies.
                      Not therefore, the IL-2 with 37mm was shaking and it was impossible to keep on course, the shells did not hit the target. When fired from a single 37mm gun, the IL-2 generally deployed in the air. They could not hit the tank on board.
                      It was an order of magnitude easier to shoot down the IL-2. The undisguised bomb Ju-87 was not easily knocked down by a fighter at the exit from the dive when it was on the machine gun.
                      The plane already managed to fly away from the zone of expansion of the AB fragments by the angle of the funnel.
                      How many Ju-87Ds were released that were reworked? 519 tanks one of the pilots of the Ju-87 is a lot. And everything is recorded on the registrars.
                      It was a question. How and when did you find out about "PTAB + IL-2 is the 1 tank for departure"?
                      Massively produced something almost one-time.
                      No really. For example, the Su-6 (when it was converted to a different engine), the Su-8 and many others, although it was another year and a half to fight the Germans. And for some reason, after IL-2 releasing his IL-10.
                      Could not what? To pour out also from hatches or baskets under FW-190? Having such an application with IL-2 before your eyes? Again they did not answer.
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 12 January 2018 13: 31 New
                        0
                        [quote] [519 tanks by one of the pilots of the Ju-87 is a lot. And everything is recorded on the registrars. / Quote]
                        Well, finally show these registrars! Or tell me where to find them! Urine is how I want to see this video!
                      2. shuravi
                        shuravi 12 January 2018 13: 43 New
                        +2
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        To refute the real effectiveness of the Ju-87 that inflicted heavy losses on the USSR with a BPSP course written by a school in which the dive-pilot never had it more than just cynicism squared.


                        How touches your aplomb. that is, aplomb of the ignorant. Which is not aware that the USSR also carried out work and practical / combat bombing from a dive. But it soon became clear that this method has a lot of limitations, in particular in terms of height. And it was essentially a temporary measure. Currently not applicable anywhere.

                        Well, you probably should remember how it was with your neighbors. This is to ensure that the passage over the Mi-24 target was not applied in your own words.


                        Well quote them. tech as you probably misinterpret them.

                        It was used on IL-2 (and there was a time for dumping), but as usual without changing this aircraft altitude and speed with all that it implies.


                        This is only your nonsense.

                        Not therefore, IL-2 with 37mm was shaking and it was impossible to keep on course, the shells did not hit the target.


                        You just do not know as always. Neither the IL-37 nor the “unit” fired bursts of 2 mm.

                        When fired from a single 37mm, the Il-2 cannon was generally deployed in the air. They could not hit the tank on board.


                        "thing" also unfolds, and also could not hit.


                        It was an order of magnitude easier to shoot down the IL-2. The undisguised bomb Ju-87 was not easily knocked down by a fighter at the exit from the dive when it was on the machine gun.


                        Again you blow bubbles out of your nose. Ju-87 was an order of magnitude easier prey.


                        The plane already managed to fly away from the zone of expansion of the AB fragments by the angle of the funnel.


                        Once again you blew a bubble out of your nose. However, you can show the profile diagram of the bombing. bully


                        How many Ju-87Ds were released that were reworked? 519 tanks one of the pilots of the Ju-87 is a lot. And everything is recorded on the registrars.


                        Are you talking about Vrudel? with his fantasies that are not confirmed by anything? laughing


                        It was a question. How and when did you find out about "PTAB + IL-2 is the 1 tank for departure"?


                        BPSP is a science. Where everything is calculated. Ammunition properties, charging, and more.


                        Massively produced something almost one-time.


                        Massively produced the best.

                        No really. For example, the Su-6 (when it was converted to a different engine), the Su-8 and many others, although it was another year and a half to fight the Germans. And for some reason, after IL-2 releasing his IL-10.


                        Again the babble of the lamer, who is sure that once a weapon has appeared that is slightly superior to the existing model, it means that the former should be stopped and the release of a new one started. Not taking into account at the same time that the inevitable restructuring of production and allies will inevitably lead to a sharp drop in the number of aircraft produced. Plus do not forget. that IL-2 had a trained flight, technical staff, suffered from "childhood diseases". Su-Xnumx, the cat in the bag.
                        Those same swabs could not redo their 109, and flew until the end of the war with a blind rear hemisphere.


                        Could not what? To pour out also from hatches or baskets under FW-190? Having such an application with IL-2 before your eyes? Again they did not answer.


                        You, or brake? But what difference does it make to me, why non-humans did not succeed. This does not negate the high effectiveness of PTAB as a VET. They were supplanted only by the new generation NAR.
                    13. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 13 January 2018 11: 23 New
                      0
                      It is a pity that the Germans did not know about these experiments, and continued to bomb from a dive.
                      Bullshit from you. Once again, you forgot about his video recorder (coursework and from the side of the tail), please visit YouTube with the video of the defeat of the Ju-87 tanks, and at least compare the number of aircraft released.
                      I would like to see a video of the defeat of the "effective" PTAB c IL-2.
                      Does not mean. Su-6, TTT, Ta-3 and others were tested, and showed a multiple of greater survival in battle. Ilyushin himself was looking for alternatives to the IL-2, including twin-engine ones. Production from IL-2 to IL-10 was still being rebuilt and expanded.
                      No, about the possibility of a rash of the same copied PTABs with FW-190 Germans, this is just a very inconvenient question for you.
                      Where and when did you find out about "PTAB + IL-2 is the 1 tank for the take-off"? In my opinion this is a very simple question. Or do not remember?
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 14 January 2018 19: 29 New
                        +1
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        It is a pity that the Germans did not know about these experiments, and continued to bomb from a dive.


                        And in the end, the production of such "magnificent" dive diversion turned.
                        Baby, have you personally dropped at least one bomb?

                        Bullshit from you. Once again, you forgot about his video recorder (coursework and from the tail),


                        The capabilities of the PHOTO recorders of those years were severely limited.


                        Welcome to YouTube with the video of the defeat of the Ju-87 tanks, and at least compare the number of aircraft produced.

                        YouTube is littered with a remake, which is only for amateurs.

                        I would like to see a video of the defeat of the "effective" PTAB c IL-2.


                        What photo doesn't suit you?

                        Does not mean. Su-6, TTT, Ta-3 and others were tested, and showed a multiple of greater survival in battle. Ilyushin himself was looking for alternatives to the IL-2, including twin-engine ones. Production from IL-2 to IL-10 was still being rebuilt and expanded.


                        That is, clearly you could not argue.


                        No, about the possibility of a rash of the same copied PTABs with FW-190 Germans, this is just a very inconvenient question for you.
                        Where and when did you find out about "PTAB + IL-2 is the 1 tank for the take-off"? In my opinion this is a very simple question. Or do not remember?


                        From the BPSP course. In general, I have no time now, so you can ask yourself what KMGU is and what ammunition it can be equipped with.
                    14. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 15 January 2018 01: 23 New
                      0
                      This does not negate the fact that he dived well and shot from a dive. With the loss of dominance in the air after the Kuban it became difficult to accompany him, but the Ju-87 was still used, part of the tasks went to the high-speed assault FW-190. Non-diving IL-2 with the same speed as the Ju-87 was produced, despite the fact that with the advent of alternatives to it, it was the worst option of all. You could not object either distinctly or even at least somehow.
                      It was impossible to improve the back view of the Me-109 because it would violate its aerodynamics, and it was the best among all propeller aircraft of all time.
                      NAR with warhead in one ton never did.
                      Quote: shuravi
                      The capabilities of the PHOTO recorders of those years were severely limited.

                      No more than others. As a result, you have “remodels” here, and “vrudel” under another article is the main argument.
                      Quote: shuravi
                      What photo doesn't suit you?

                      The fact that the process is not visible. They knew how to fake photos even then. Making the wrong captions under them is even easier. Your above shows that for a tank without an on-board screen, the suspension, which on this type in the field was repaired for a long time and was heavily repaired.
                      You were misled about the effectiveness of PTAB, if they were effective they would have been used by the Germans in the same way (and the same ones).
                      Helicopter bombs are thrown differently.
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 15 January 2018 02: 14 New
                        0
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        This does not negate the fact that he dived well and shot from a dive.


                        It is only in your fantasies. And here is the reality:
                        In tests, the Ju87G-1 proved to be slow and very slow, which, combined with reduced armor and weak defensive weapons, made the machine an ideal target for fighter jets. The maximum speed of the aircraft decreased by 30-40 km / h. Ju87G-1 did not dive anymore (although there were brake shields on the tested experimental vehicles), the attack was carried out with planning at angles no more than 10-12gr. In addition, according to the testimony of captured German pilots, entry into planning was difficult. Aiming was also difficult due to the poor track stability of the aircraft, due to the aerodynamic influence of the cannon mounts, large spaced masses (the weight of one gun with a gun carriage, excluding the weight of the magazine and shells, 473 kg).
                        VK 3.7 guns had a rather low rate of fire and low reliability of automation. According to German data, the gun had a rate of fire up to 70 rounds per minute. However, according to the SRI Air Force Research Institute, the gun’s combat rate of fire was limited to an average of one shot per two seconds. The low practical rate of fire of the guns themselves led to a very limited number of shots (no more than two) in one attack. The situation was aggravated by the strong recoil of the guns when firing in the air and the specifics of placing them on the machine. For these reasons, the attack aircraft experienced a strong diving moment and there was a buildup of the aircraft in the longitudinal plane when firing in the air. Keeping the line of sight on the target while firing at ground targets and entering corrections into the aiming was an almost impossible task. Therefore, only the first shot could be aimed.


                        With the loss of air supremacy after the Kuban, it became difficult to accompany him, but Ju-87 was still used, part of the tasks went to the high-speed assault FW-190.


                        Are you still raving? You can give confirmation, as your lamer words cost nothing.


                        Non-diving IL-2 was produced at the same speed as Ju-87, despite the fact that with the advent of alternatives to it, it was the worst option of all. You could not object either distinctly or even at least somehow.


                        You, an ignoramus, have already been explained that no one will stop the established production during the war, for the sake of insignificant advantages.
                        But you keep stupid.


                        It was impossible to improve the back view of the Me-109 because it would violate its aerodynamics, and it was the best among all propeller aircraft of all time.


                        Is everything right with your head? laughing
                        Kid, all the virtue of 109 is its manufacturability. The aerodynamics there are very mediocre, just compare with the same Yak-3.
                        And blind, and this was a very significant drawback from behind, he remained because it required a radical alteration of the fuselage, which negatively affected production.


                        NAR with warhead in one ton never did.


                        Why the hell? Do you have any idea what the total weight of the entire bunk will be? And for what medium, for what purpose?


                        No more than others. As a result, you have “remodels” here, and “vrudel” under another article is the main argument.


                        Well, I'm not an ignoramus like you. And I can tell where the cannon fire is given the launch of an ATGM.


                        The fact that the process is not visible.


                        For a specialist, enough result. Nothing will help you.

                        They knew how to fake photos even then. Making the wrong captions under them is even easier. Your above shows that for a tank without an on-board screen, the suspension, which on this type in the field was long and hard repaired, was disabled.

                        That's what I was talking about. nothing will help you. interpreting the photo you are completely nonsense. For there are clear PTAB hits both on board and in the tower.
                        By the way, no one “Tigers” did not screen.


                        You were misled about the effectiveness of PTAB, if they were effective they would have been used by the Germans in the same way (and the same ones).


                        Stop blowing bubbles out of your nose. You do not even know how the effectiveness of weapons is determined.


                        Helicopter bombs are thrown differently.


                        What are you saying, well tell me how bombing with the Mi-24 is fundamentally different from the IL-2?
                    15. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 15 January 2018 02: 58 New
                      0
                      Look for another source. Without brake flaps, the lightweight Ju-87 could dive up to 60 degrees, cannon gondolas were also added. The defeat was usually achieved by a burst of 3 shells. What else could be with the G-2? Which was released 208pcs?
                      To rave about what? About the Kuban?
                      You need to be an ignoramus to get that motivation. Well, they would have fought on LaGG, Yak-1 and I-16.
                      You somehow somehow mediocre except the Soviet, where even the engine did not learn how to turn. This alteration was impossible, he already had a thin tail duralumin beam, not like the Yak-3.
                      For some. This was to the fact that this dive had such a bomb.
                      I don’t know what you distinguished from what others confused.
                      The result is important for boys unfamiliar with the process.
                      There is but no penetration. She did not take him aboard, only the middle ones and without shields. By the way, they screened.
                      IL-2 flies lower, twice as fast and its blades do not fly off.
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 15 January 2018 21: 48 New
                        +1
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        Look for another source. Without brake flaps, the lightweight Ju-87 could dive to 60 degrees, cannon gondolas were also added.


                        Do you have another bout of delirium? What are the brake flaps? They were removed because the Ju-87 aircraft with hanging guns could no longer dive in principle.
                        That's why they removed the shields as unnecessary, because 950 kg of constant mass on the suspensions, they could no longer compost. Yes, and the elevator was already not enough, plus due to the increase in constant mass, it was necessary to reduce the overload, that is, with 1000 the radius was not enough.
                        Besides. The suspension of the guns aerodynamically gave a moment to dive.


                        Defeat was usually achieved by a burst of 3 shells.


                        Are you babbling again? What is the queue at a rate of fire less than 70 v / m? Yes, during this time, the aircraft managed to fly 50-80 meters.
                        And if you don’t know, then the distance between the points of the suspension of the cannons of the “Lapotnik” is such that a hundred tanks were placed.
                        Therefore, the reduction of trunks to the optimum range was performed.

                        That’s why they succeeded, only one shot, then they left the aiming zone. And what are the queues when loading 6-8 (at the end of 12) shells to the barrel?


                        What else could be with the G-2? Which were released 208pcs?


                        Such a meager release and shows how crappy the plane is.


                        To rave about what? About the Kuban?


                        Yes, you have nonsense about everything.

                        You need to be an ignoramus to get that motivation. Well, they would have fought on LaGG, Yak-1 and I-16.


                        Yes, you are certainly an ignoramus. For La-5, La-7, is a further development of LaGG-3, with full preservation of the basic technological processes. I-3, development of the Yak-1. I-16 was discontinued as not meeting the requirements and having exhausted the resource of modernization.


                        You somehow somehow mediocre except the Soviet, where even the engine did not learn how to turn. This alteration was impossible, he already had a thin tail duralumin beam, not like the Yak-3.


                        So what. But still on the Yak-1 the garroth was removed and the pilot received a much-needed overview of the rear hemisphere.
                        So did the British, the Americans. And only the "thin" remained half-blind. The Germans understood this, but could not do anything, because for a radical alteration it was required to put up with at least a decrease in the number of aircraft produced. And it was like death, since losses on the eastern front were critical. Although one of the reasons rubbed the "thin" is their partial blindness.


                        For some. This was to the fact that this dive had such a bomb.


                        And what the hell is she diving, when the height of its discharge is such that it negates all the advantages of diving?


                        I don’t know what you distinguished from what others confused.
                        The result is important for boys unfamiliar with the process.


                        Finally, you started talking truthfully about yourself.


                        There is but no penetration. She did not take him aboard, only the middle ones and without shields.


                        There you can clearly see the meeting angle of the order of 90 *. At this angle, the PTAB took 100 mm of armor.

                        By the way, they screened.


                        "Fours" screened. "Tiger" was already overweight.

                        IL-2 flies lower


                        Yah? Well, small, determine what height. All photos from the Mi-24 cockpit. bully





                        two times faster


                        The maximum speed of IL-2 at the ground, depending on the series, 370-400 km / h, helicopter Mi-24В (П) 335 km / h.
                        Learn arithmetic.

                        and his blades do not fly off


                        Oh well, and you give a lot of such examples?

                        The question remains, what is the difference between the bombing of the IL-2 and Mi-24? bully
                    16. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 16 January 2018 02: 07 New
                      0
                      On the pendants to the guns there were up to 1800kg bombs, which were not dropped all at once, when diving in 60 and not in 85 there was enough hail, the next nonsense you have about all this.
                      For 50-80m, he remained in the corridor of information trunks with a large margin. Further it was necessary to turn away or exit the dive.
                      What about the 2800 Ju-87D before that, which were remade into cannon?
                      What nonsense about the Kuban? Isn't the Luftwaffe raking there?
                      Such a development that especially in La-7 there was nothing left of LaGG. Yak-9 and Yak-3 on Yak-1 are similar only to the ignorant. The I-16 was shot because it was not even for average pilots.
                      Even on the Yak-1 would have learned if it was not forbidden to turn the motor over. As a result of a radical alteration, the Me-109 would lose all its advantages in aerodynamics.
                      The drop height of the 1 ton bomb of a dive is not equal to the drop height of 250 kg of a helicopter.
                      Finally, you started talking truthfully about yourself.

                      Where is the PTAB application video? At least one from start to finish?
                      In the photo, almost no black dot is visible in the center which in the photo is not necessarily cross-cutting. Screen for premature operation, it is not necessary to be heavy.
                      So many Mi-24 flew when it set a record. They threw 250 from this height so that not only the blades would fly off?
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 16 January 2018 21: 51 New
                        0
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        On the pendants to the guns there were up to 1800kg bombs, which were not dropped all at once, when diving in 60 and not in 85 there was enough hail, the next nonsense you have about all this.


                        Boy, you once again crap. 1800 kg, this is due to the drain of fuel. This is the time. In addition, there was no question of any dive with such a load.
                        However, you can cite the facts. bully

                        For 50-80, he remained in the corridor of information trunks with a large margin.


                        The whole stock was eaten by inaccuracies.

                        Further it was necessary to turn away or exit the dive.


                        What a dive, boy, 15 *? laughing


                        What about the 2800 Ju-87D before that, which were remade into cannon?


                        They were banally removed from the eastern front. When the superiority in the air of the Fritz ended. The targets were too light.

                        What nonsense about the Kuban? Isn't the Luftwaffe raking there?


                        To your chagrin, it is raked.

                        Such a development that especially in La 7 there is nothing left of LaGG.

                        Are you serious? Well, you and the kettle. laughing

                        Yak-9 and Yak-3 on Yak-1 are similar only to ignoramuses.


                        Oh, so you also love to cheat?
                        But it won’t save you, Yak-3, this is the development of Yak-1, I didn’t mention a different line about Yak-9.

                        And-16 filmed because it was not even for average pilots.


                        How do you love to show your nonsense. laughing


                        Even at the Yak-1 they would have learned if it were not forbidden to turn the motor over.


                        Don’t you addict for an hour?


                        As a result of a radical alteration, the Me-109 would lose all its advantages in aerodynamics.


                        Well, and what? bully

                        The drop height of the 1 ton bomb of a dive is not equal to the drop height of 250 kg of a helicopter.


                        Well, baby, tell me, the pilot, what is the difference. By the way, rkch about the comparison of the IL-2 with Mi-24 was, nevertheless.



                        Where is the PTAB application video? At least one from start to finish?


                        But why?


                        The black dot in the center, which is not necessarily end-to-end in the photo, is almost nowhere to be seen in the photo.


                        You just rave, because you have neither experience nor knowledge in these matters.

                        Screen for premature operation, it is not necessary to be heavy.


                        Again you crap, there by weight nothing was already a story.


                        So many Mi-24 flew when he set a record.


                        335, this is not a record, but the horizontal flight speed allowed by the crew instruction, a record, 368 km / h, as always, you do not know.

                        Did they throw 250 from this height so that not only the blades fly off?


                        Trying to trolling? Alas, you only get a demonstration of your own ignorance.
                    17. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 17 January 2018 04: 48 New
                      0
                      Without gondolas, the Ju-87 bombed from a dive of 40-50 degrees without releasing the brakes, for 60 with gondolas and without bombs they became unnecessary. What other errors to parallax which was considered by reduction? How would he land with 15 possible would go at all? Have you tried to start thinking about it?
                      It already seemed to me that yours.
                      The metal was La-7, LAGG wooden. Yak-3 is a gesture of despair created by the relief and compression of the Yak-1 with the same engine. On I-16 pilots could be prepared only in peacetime, the Germans did not call him “Rat” for nothing.
                      Helicopter, as stated. Focusing more on the arrow?
                      Then, for example, you started looking for 37mm.
                      Even a tin sheet?
                      Stormed Mi-24 with which? Without laying under yourself, and so that you can comfortably turn away without a pass over the target?
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 17 January 2018 21: 39 New
                        0
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        Without gondolas, the Ju-87 bombed from a dive in 40-50 degrees without releasing the brakes,


                        This is not a cool dive.

                        for 60 with gondolas and without bombs they were no longer needed.


                        Your words are worthless. evidence of firing their guns at such an angle in the studio.


                        What other errors to parallax which was considered by reduction?


                        So funny. when teapots like you are trying to flaunt the terms, but at the same time reminding the famous monkey from the fable about glasses.
                        Parallax baby, this is the distance between the line of sight of the sight and the axis of the weapon.
                        The information compensates for the spacing, that is, the distance between the axes of the weapon.

                        How would he land with 15 possible at all? Have you tried to start thinking about it?


                        Do you think that approaching dive? laughing

                        It already seemed to me that yours.


                        You don’t think you are raving.

                        The metal was La 7, LAGG wooden.


                        Oh god, what an ignoramus you are. laughing
                        The wooden ones were LaGG-3, LaG-5, La-5, La-5FN.
                        Partially used metal (wing spar and something else) on La-7, La-9.
                        And only La Xnumx was metal.

                        Yak-3 is a gesture of despair created by the relief and compression of Yak-1


                        This was a further development of the Yak-1, the resulting machine terrifying all Luftwaffe pilots.

                        with the same motor. On I-16 pilots could be prepared only in peacetime,


                        This is a car of the thirties, and very successful. Could compete on equal terms with newer cars.

                        the Germans did not call him “Rat” for nothing.


                        Because in aerial combat was not inferior to thin. And sentenced many "Fritz".


                        Helicopter, as stated. Focusing more on the arrow?


                        Now you want to show that there is also an absolute ram in the system of training flight personnel in the USSR / RF?


                        Then, for example, you started looking for 37mm.
                        Even a tin sheet?
                        Stormed Mi-24 with which? Without laying under yourself, and so that you can comfortably turn away without a pass over the target?


                        Do not Julia, baby. You have a clear question.
                        The question remains, what is the difference between the bombing of the IL-2 and Mi-24?
                        Answer, I won’t let you go aside. bully
                    18. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 18 January 2018 16: 32 New
                      0
                      And what prevented them from firing cannons at such a diving angle in 60 deg?
                      If the brakes were needed they wouldn’t be removed on the G.
                      What else came up with the errors that were eaten higher than parallax? There below, your "colleague" writes about the interval of the order of fire of 250-700m, it is clearly wider than 50-80m, from several to ten times.
                      La Xnumx is generally metallic La Xnumx. Many La 7 were already completely metal. This was due to the fact that there was a significant change in production.
                      The resulting machine at first fell apart sometimes on its own sometimes from the 1 bullet 7,62 but there was simply no way out, the Yak-1 already had low survivability, but usually it was necessary more than the 2's.
                      I-16 was very difficult to manage.
                      You try to go aside all the time, because IL-2 passed over the target and there was time for a reset after firing from cannons. With hits not on the roof but on board the photos of which you yourself found.
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 18 January 2018 23: 03 New
                        0
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        And what prevented them from firing cannons at such a diving angle in 60 deg?


                        Increased weight and worst aerodynamics.

                        If the brakes were needed they wouldn’t be removed on the G.


                        Therefore, they removed it because it was no longer diving.


                        What else came up with the errors that were eaten higher than parallax?


                        Parallax and spacing trunks, this is not an error.

                        There, below, your “colleague” writes about the interval of the command of fire in 250-700m, it is clearly wider than 50-80m, from several to ten times.


                        You are simply not a specialist are not able to understand what it is about.


                        La Xnumx is generally metallic La Xnumx. Many La 7 were already completely metal. This was due to the fact that there was a significant change in production.



                        You are definitely mentally unwell.
                        http://wunderwafe.ru/Magazine/AirWar/70/14.htm

                        Technical Description of La 7



                        La-7 fighter is a single-seat single-engine low-wing mixed-wing design with retractable three-leg landing gear with a tail pillar. The oval cross-section fuselage is a wooden semi-monocoque structure, including four spars and fifteen frames. Spars are made of pine and plywood. Spars have a tapering shape, thicker in the nose of the fuselage and thinner in the tail. The frames are also made of pine, in places of the greatest load reinforced with plywood or delta wood. Delta wood is glued directly to the frames in the places necessary for reasons of strength. The left and right halves of the fuselage skin are glued from birch veneer and glued to each other and to the power set by glue based on resin. The thickness of one layer of veneer varies from 0,75 to 1,5 mm. The fuselage halves are glued from four to eight layers. The direction of the wood layers in each veneer layer is oriented at an angle of 90 degrees to the previous layer. The fuselage halves are glued out under strict observance of the orientation requirements for the veneer layers at an angle of 45 degrees to the longitudinal axis of the aircraft. The total skin thickness varies from 3 mm in the region of the 15 frame to 6,8 mm in the region of the 1 frame. The casing is glued directly to the side members and frames. The oil cooler tunnel is made of steel sheet and is attached to the power set of the 20 fuselage by bolts between the frames No. 4 and 7. The junction of the wing and fuselage is closed by the upper and lower gaps. The lower runway is monolithic wooden, the upper (right and left) - of four tin plates each. Lifts are attached to the central part of the fuselage and to the engine hood. The engine mount is attached to the frame No. 1, in addition to the engine, weapons are installed on the engine mount. The motor frame is welded from chromium-molybdenum steel pipes.

                        A closed cockpit is located between the frames No. 2 and No. 7. Cabin glazing consists of three transparent segments: a visor, a movable part and a rear fixed part of the lamp. Transparent glazing elements are attached to the frame from steel corpses using metal bands on rivets. Inside the visor, the cabin is equipped with 55 mm thick bulletproof glass. In front of the bulletproof glass is the PBL-1В collimator sight, which has two rings for shooting in flight at speeds of 200 km / h and 300 km / h. To the right and left of the sight, there are mounted handles for mechanical reloading of guns. To access the radio equipment, the left side of the rear fixed segment of the cab lantern is removable. Behind the pilot's seat, a transparent armored head with a thickness of 66 mm is installed. The rear segment of the lantern is located 5-m and 7-m frames, the armored head is attached to the 5-m frame and the binding of the cab light. A steel armor plate with a thickness of 5 mm is also attached to the 8,5 frame. The pilot’s seat is made of duralumin with a thickness of 1 mm and is designed using a PL-3M parachute by the pilot. The movable lamp segment moves along C-shaped guides, there is an emergency reset mechanism for the movable segment.

                        The center section is the main power element of the airframe design. It consists of two metal spars, ten ribs of mixed design and wooden stringers. The center wing panel is made of birch veneer and is attached to the power set using VIAM B-3 epoxy glue. The center section spars have an I-section, the shelves are made of their chromium-molybdenum steel, the walls are made of duralumin.

                        The front spar is fastened to the panels that cover the inside of the wheel wells of the chassis and the panels that cover the central fuel tank, and the attachment points of the center section to the engine mount. On the front side members there are also axles for attaching the hydraulic cylinders for cleaning the main landing gear legs and attachment points for the supports themselves. On the rear side member are the attachment points of the center section to the fuselage, the central fuel tank and the flap linkage assemblies.

                        In the center section there are wells in which the wheels of the main landing gear are retracted; wells are glued from veneer with a thickness of 2 mm. The thickness of the skin in the center section toe is 4 mm, between the side members - 5 mm and 3 mm - between the rear side member and the flap. The lining is made of several words of birch veneer, wood fibers when gluing veneer layers are oriented in the same way as when gluing the fuselage halves.

                        The design of the detachable wing consoles is similar to the design of the center section. The power kit of the console includes two metal spars, 15 wooden frames and 14 stringers. The design is assembled on VIAM B-3 epoxy glue. The thickness of the birch veneer sheathing varies from 4 to 2,5 mm. Wing Profile - NASA-230.

                        Ailerons - type Fries, with internal aerodynamic compensation. The aileron power kit includes a tubular duralumin spar and 9 duralumin ribs. The front and rear edges of the aileron are sheathed with duralumin strips of thickness 0,8 mm. The steel balancer on the aircraft of the early series was located between the ribs No. 5 and 7, on the aircraft of the later series - between the ribs No. 2 and 5. A fixed trimmer plate is mounted on the trailing edge of the aileron between ribs No. 1 and 3, and the trimmer is adjusted on the ground. Linen sheathing of the aileron is glued to the power set with VIAM epoxy glue. The aileron is hung on the wing console by means of three loops, the maximum aileron deflection angles are +/- 18 degrees.

                        Landing flaps are hung on piano loops between ribs No. 1 of the center section and ribs No. 7 of the wing console. Flaps consists of four sections, two - attached to the center wing and two - to the wing consoles (one to each). Flap sections are entirely made of duralumin plates reinforced with Z-shaped stiffeners. The maximum flap deflection angle is 60 degrees.

                        Duralumin slats are attached to the socks of the wing consoles between ribs No. 6 and 14. Slats are automatically released when the aircraft reaches a certain angle of attack.

                        The tail unit consists of a vertical keel, a rudder and a horizontal stabilizer with elevators. The keel is an integral part of the fuselage. The console type stabilizer power kit includes two frames and 7 ribs, a nose stringer, two upper and two lower stringers.

                        Stringers are made of pine and reinforced with delta wood or plywood. Sheathing - birch veneer, thickness 2,5 mm. The stabilizer is attached to the fuselage between the frames No. 12 and 14. The elevator consists of the left and right halves. The power set of the elevator halves is duralumin and includes a spar and 9 ribs, a metal sock and a trailing edge. In the toe of the elevator halves, a steel balancer is reinforced between ribs No. 5 and 9 (weight 2,8 kg on the left half and weight 2,0 kg on the right). A controlled trimmer is installed between ribs No. 2 and 5 on the left half of the elevator. Lining of rudders of height and direction - linen from ACT-100 fabric. The range of elevation deviation angles is from + 30 degrees to -15 degrees. 30 min., Trimmer - +/- 17 deg.

                        The design of the steering wheel is similar to the design of the elevator, but it has 10, not 9, ribs.



                        The resulting machine at first fell apart sometimes on its own sometimes from the 1 bullet 7,62 but there was simply no way out, the Yak-1 already had low survivability, but usually it was necessary more than the 2's.


                        Evidence in the studio, your blah blah is worthless.


                        I-16 was very difficult to manage.


                        He was strict in management, but not difficult.

                        You try to go aside all the time, because IL-2 passed over the target and there was time for a reset after firing from cannons. With hits not on the roof but on board the photos of which you yourself found.


                        Stop bustling, answer:

                        What is the difference between bombing with IL-2 and Mi-24?
                    19. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 19 January 2018 03: 13 New
                      0
                      The weight was less than with bombs; on a dive it is worsened.
                      They took it off because of the large cross section of the nacelles and the reduction of the dive angle from 85 to 60 + the brakes were no longer needed.
                      You had about "other errors" there.
                      You just got it wrong
                      All-metal for aces were attempts to create another La-5, and so it turned out La-7, on a significant part of which they began to roll back to the tree.
                      By survivability, Jacob yourself is easy to find.
                      On I-16 beat more than lost.
                      Juliet and crap you whole branch, especially about PTAB with IL-2, it is easy to see if you reread it. The specific amount of delirium about the "Drill" truth was even higher.
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 19 January 2018 19: 19 New
                        +1
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        The weight was less than with bombs; on a dive it is worsened.


                        You’re lying boy, the weight of the gondolas was equal to the normal bomb load.


                        They took it off because of the large cross section of the nacelles and the reduction of the dive angle from 85 to 60 + the brakes were no longer needed.


                        Are you a woodpecker to say that? The area of ​​brakes, gondolas, CX in the studio.

                        You had about "other errors" there.
                        You just got it wrong


                        No, it’s just that you don’t understand what it is about, by ignorance.


                        All-metal for aces were attempts to create another La-5, and so it turned out La-7, on a significant part of which they began to roll back to the tree.


                        Facts in the studio.


                        By survivability, Jacob yourself is easy to find.


                        Found tenacious.


                        On I-16 beat more than lost.


                        You are lying without evidence.


                        Juliet and crap you whole branch, especially about PTAB with IL-2, it is easy to see if you reread it. The specific amount of delirium about the "Drill" truth was even higher.


                        So where?
                        What is the difference between bombing with IL-2 and Mi-24?
                        You proceeded to shit stating the difference?
                    20. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 20 January 2018 22: 50 New
                      0
                      There was less. And the cross section was much larger than the bomb load. Once again, you forgot to take into account the change in dive angle from 85 to 60 +
                      Quote: shuravi
                      The Ju87G-1 did not dive anymore (although there were brake flaps on the tested experimental vehicles), the targets were attacked with planning at angles of no more than 10-12 g.

                      The G-2 were at the front, not the G-1 which had a reduced wing. and probably because of planning because the engine should not have been heard? throw your source in the trash
                      Quote: shuravi
                      Found tenacious.

                      how much Several times the Yak was less tenacious than La, about the line of yaks, too, better not to write.
                      Here. That you come to him. IL-2 bombing is low in height and inability to turn away from the target. Therefore, the tank on board and not in the roof and in one go.
                      What's up with Drill? And with a video of tank bombings in another thread here.
                      Be more careful with the terminology, ponies and their friends can go around in circles and meditate on moderators. Types of comments from them immediately for a month in the bath or for life.
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 21 January 2018 22: 12 New
                        0
                        Quote: DalaiLama
                        There was less. And the cross section was much larger than the bomb load. Once again, you forgot to take into account the change in dive angle from 85 to 60 +


                        Are you talking nonsense.


                        The G-2 were at the front, not the G-1 which had a reduced wing. and probably because of planning because the engine should not have been heard? throw your source in the trash


                        Boy, your words do not refute him. Especially since you are raving.

                        how much Several times the Yak was less tenacious than La, about the line of yaks, too, better not to write.


                        Evidence of where, the words of the troll, that is, you, do not count.


                        Here. That you come to him. IL-2 bombing is low in height and inability to turn away from the target. Therefore, the tank on board and not in the roof and in one go.


                        You . Mi-24 can bomb with PMV.


                        What's up with Drill? And with a video of tank bombings in another thread here.
                        Be more careful with the terminology, ponies and their friends can go around in circles and meditate on moderators. Types of comments from them immediately for a month in the bath or for life.


                        That is, you already began to knock. But you see what the matter is, baby. The site administration of course takes care of the visit, but who do you think it will choose, you, or me?
                        http://artofwar.ru/l/lisowoj_w_i/
                    21. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 22 January 2018 10: 04 New
                      0
                      Evidence Why? You Ju-87 G-1 from G-2 again can not distinguish. How would he plan, not dive, with the engine turned off?
                      250kg bomb with a passage over the target and not afraid of fragments?
                      Your helicopter flew from an aircraft carrier to write about the exclusively anti-Poirish appointment of the latter?
                      So far, ponies decide whose comments to leave to the moderators.
            2. Dalailama
              Dalailama 31 December 2017 11: 33 New
              0
              IL-2 at the exit from the attack using guns passed over the target at 25-30m.
              1. The comment was deleted.
  11. yarema vishneveckiy
    yarema vishneveckiy 31 December 2017 10: 56 New
    +1
    Russian tank troops lost 4 thousand tanks in the 55 years of the war, this is off. USSR statistics on manufactured products ... Who destroyed them ?????? AnalEtegi, mother is vigorous ...
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 31 December 2017 11: 34 New
      +1
      Quote: yarema vishneveckiy
      Who destroyed them?

      What will be your statistics on the causes of losses?
  12. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 2 January 2018 15: 18 New
    +2
    Everything is very reminiscent of the successes of the best German warrior of all time the world famous Baron Mungausen.
    All warriors in World War II and then in the Korean War used aircraft with RS, bombs and guns to destroy tanks, but the result is unsatisfactory to say the least.
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 2 January 2018 16: 10 New
      0
      Aviation with rocket-propelled grenade launchers and the first serious NAR was used only by the Germans, as well as guns on dive-bombers.
      In this rather serious book, so far only the portrait of the Hartman, the whole portrait of Rudel, who did not hunt for beginners and whose account is unfortunately inflated (XNUMX times), is what the Germans themselves, who can think of, are well aware of.
      1. Dooplet11
        Dooplet11 11 January 2018 12: 56 New
        0
        Aviation with rocket-propelled grenade launchers and the first serious NAR was used only by the Germans, as well as guns on dive-bombers.
        Of course, you did not hear about Dynamo-guns of Kurchevsky. About RBS-132 or English 60lb SAP No2 Mk.I, too, not to mention American? You don’t know about the fact that Ju-87G with guns ceased to be a diver, and had a permitted dive angle less than the Il-2 with 37mm?
        Rudel, who did not hunt newcomers and whose account, alas, was not inflated (one and a half times), which the Germans themselves, of those who know how to think, are well aware.
        Did you consider each tank behind Rudel? Where are the firewood about "nonsense"?
        You at least in your favorite Google make inquiries before you comment on anything. laughing
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 11 January 2018 14: 38 New
          0
          Quote: Dooplet11
          You don’t know about the fact that the Ju-87G with guns ceased to be a diver, and had a permitted dive angle less than the Il-2 with 37mm?

          where did this crap come from?
          Here the anti-tank theme, RSs and everything else like this is not at work.
          Quote: Dooplet11
          Did you consider each tank behind Rudel? Where are the firewood about "nonsense"?

          after him, the registrar recorded everything.
          1. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 11 January 2018 15: 35 New
            0
            where did this crap come from?

            Yes, even here:
            http://putnikost.gorod.tomsk.ru/index-1270372946.
            php
            “In tests, the Ju87G-1 proved to be slow and very slow, which, combined with reduced armor and weak defensive weapons, made the car an ideal target for fighter aircraft. The maximum speed of the aircraft decreased by 30-40 km / h. Ju87G-1 did not dive anymore (although there were brake flaps on the test vehicles undergoing testing), the target attack was carried out with planning at angles no more than 10-12g. In addition, according to the testimony of captured German pilots, entry into planning was difficult. Aiming was also difficult due to the poor track stability of the aircraft, due to the aerodynamic effect of the cannon mounts, large spaced masses (the weight of one gun with a gun carriage, excluding the weight of the magazine and shells, 473 kg). "
            Here the anti-tank theme, RSs and everything else like this is not at work.

            You know, all of the listed RSs are anti-tank.
            followed by the registrar all wrote down.

            Where to find all registrar records on all declared victories? Since they are not blown, then there should be a record for each, right?
            1. Dooplet11
              Dooplet11 11 January 2018 16: 01 New
              0
              I'd like to see all registrar records on 519 tanks, 800 vehicles, 150 artillery, 70 landing boats, nine aircraft, four armored trains, several bridges, two cruisers and the battleship Marat. Well, have you seen them, since you say that everyone is not blown up?
              1. Dalailama
                Dalailama 12 January 2018 07: 24 New
                0
                Watch do not get tired?
                Quote: Dooplet11
                You know, all of the listed RSs are anti-tank.

                You know, they were inaud. And why did the Anglo-Americans also not be seen PTAB?
                Quote: Dooplet11
                no more than 10-12gr.

                How, then, did he dive with an angle of at least 60 city, hitting tanks in the roof?
                1. Dooplet11
                  Dooplet11 12 January 2018 10: 27 New
                  0
                  Watch do not get tired?
                  Are you not tired? But now you can argue that everything is shot and everything is not blown. I'm ready to strain too!
                  You know, they were inaud. And why did the Anglo-Americans also not be seen PTAB?
                  I don’t know about Ineud. Probably because they didn’t. For the time being, according to the need for application, and then on the development time factor.
                  How, then, did he dive with an angle of at least 60 city, hitting tanks in the roof?
                  With 37 mm? Where? Show? Otherwise, only in your fantasies!
                  1. Dalailama
                    Dalailama 13 January 2018 12: 27 New
                    0
                    There is a desire to personally check - go ahead, report on the results here. For all other Ju-87 pilots, don't forget. For all army snipers without
                    DVRs with a large or the same score at the same time.
                    What is there to develop in this Soviet PTAB? Would copy and
                    all, despite the fact that the cumulative charge was invented by them.
                    On YouTube, please, there’s a video of diving from dives. With fantasies
                    more convenient for you.
                    1. Dooplet11
                      Dooplet11 13 January 2018 15: 21 New
                      0
                      Those videos that are with shooting Stucks with 37mm, everywhere the angle is about 10 degrees. Nowhere is there a video with a cool dive.
                      And according to Rudel, your discharge has been counted!
                      1. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 15 January 2018 02: 07 New
                        0
                        This is probably some kind of remake.
                        Quote: shuravi
                        YouTube is littered with a remake, which is only for amateurs.
                    2. Dooplet11
                      Dooplet11 16 January 2018 14: 35 New
                      0
                      There is a desire to personally check - go ahead, report on the results here. For all other Ju-87 pilots do not forget

                      I report. At the request of "Gankama Rudel" and "Hans Ulrich Rudel gancam" in two hours of searching, no reliable gamkam with his work was found. Where are all these 500 more than "all recorded"?
                      Video with shooting 37mm on a steep dive was not found either.
                      1. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 17 January 2018 04: 51 New
                        0
                        bad, not the words, flight simulators means they took the whole place, or google violated network neutrality, although you doubted something there.
                        What did you find about PTAB?
  13. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 2 January 2018 15: 26 New
    +2
    Quote: yarema vishneveckiy
    Russian tank troops lost 4 thousand tanks in the 55 years of the war, this is off. USSR statistics on manufactured products ... Who destroyed them ?????? AnalEtegi, mother is vigorous ...

    The USSR lost 1941 thousand tanks in the war of 45-96 according to official statistics, but only 4-5% of them are from the Luftwaffe.
    In Korea, 1950, after 3 months of absolute air supremacy (until the end of September), American aviation destroyed 102 Korean tanks (estimated by the commissions from the Air Force) or 37 Korean tanks (estimated by the commissions from the ground forces).
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 2 January 2018 16: 10 New
      0
      The main losses tanks always suffered from mines. Also infantry, only from mortars.
      1. Dooplet11
        Dooplet11 11 January 2018 13: 16 New
        0
        You probably own statistics. do not share who counted, counted and where published?
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 11 January 2018 14: 41 New
          0
          I will not share, look for yourself.
          1. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 11 January 2018 15: 26 New
            0
            So, you yourself came up with it. What for?
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 12 January 2018 07: 25 New
              0
              What will be yours in this regard?
              1. Golovan Jack
                Golovan Jack 12 January 2018 07: 27 New
                +5
                Quote: DalaiLama
                What will be yours for this ...

                (thoughtfully): the robot broke down, the campaign recourse
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 12 January 2018 07: 37 New
                  0
                  Let's see how serious the injury will be. May return to its natural habitat and quit smoking.
                  1. Golovan Jack
                    Golovan Jack 12 January 2018 07: 40 New
                    +5
                    Quote: DalaiLama
                    Let's see how serious the injury is.

                    Oh, fixed ... whipped up laughing
                    Quote: DalaiLama
                    ... is in trouble ...
                    1. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 12 January 2018 07: 49 New
                      0
                      it will be harder to quit smoking.
              2. Dooplet11
                Dooplet11 12 January 2018 10: 31 New
                0
                DalaiLama Today, 07: 25 ↑
                What will be yours in this regard?


                It was not me who made statements on the distribution of losses. You. And without the appropriate documents, this is just your opinion, not a fact.
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 13 January 2018 12: 32 New
                  0
                  Quote: Dooplet11
                  And without the appropriate documents, this is just your opinion, not a fact.

                  this is just your opinion, which is not a fact.
                  Please, cite your question on the relevant subject twice against it, or write down arguments why this may not be so.
                  1. Dooplet11
                    Dooplet11 13 January 2018 15: 17 New
                    0
                    What for? If I must believe you on the fact of the word, then you must believe me verbally that I do not believe you.
                    1. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 15 January 2018 02: 09 New
                      0
                      A word to what? Then what if you do not consider the distribution of losses for this, then at least give your own.
  14. fighter angel
    fighter angel 4 January 2018 12: 35 New
    0
    By the way, I would like to ask the author, who signed as Vyacheslav Maltsev, had General Vlasov, a vile traitor, the founder of the so-called "roa", the so-called "commander of the backlash-ROA", someone Maltsev, and if memory serves me right, also named after Vyacheslav. That is - Vyacheslav Maltsev, a traitor who crossed over to the Germans. A curious coincidence, isn’t it, the author is a signatory, like Vyacheslav Maltsev ???
    I didn’t want to say anything by this, let alone draw any conclusions, but - you must admit, strange, however, coincidences occur ...
  15. fighter angel
    fighter angel 7 January 2018 15: 34 New
    0
    ATTENTION TO ALL IN COMMENTS! Dalaylama- LIES, FACES FACTS! Do not enter into a discussion with him.
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 8 January 2018 00: 13 New
      0
      Something here, all the "aviators" are not adequate? One New York Times did not read Truman and believes that the Spaniards drove carts throughout the war and that some beans for pansher chocolate are growing in Switzerland. The second "academic" Me-163 with Max = 0,91 in pipes of more than 0,7 was allegedly not blown.
      1. Dooplet11
        Dooplet11 11 January 2018 13: 01 New
        0
        The second “academic” Me-163 with Max = 0,91 in the pipes more than 0,7 was allegedly not blown.
        But did the Germans have transonic full-size wind tunnels? Can you tell me where and what size?
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 11 January 2018 14: 28 New
          0
          It was all that was necessary, for example, the Me-163 with a wing without ridges flew 0,91 and did not collapse, and P.13 with an engine was blown up to Mach 2.5.
          1. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 11 January 2018 14: 42 New
            0
            Where was it? Address? Pipe parameters? Once you say that it was, you must know! Where is the result of blowing Me-163 to M = 0,91?
            Is that your thought ?:
            A clean wing is when without ridges, with the so-called other comrades, cool.

            The deepest knowledge in aerodynamics!
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 11 January 2018 14: 46 New
              0
              Quote: Dooplet11
              Where is the result of blowing Me-163 at M = 0,91?

              you really graduated from MAI?
              1. Dooplet11
                Dooplet11 11 January 2018 15: 04 New
                0
                True. So is this your thought ?:
                A clean wing is when without ridges, with the so-called other comrades, cool.

                Revelation!
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 12 January 2018 07: 27 New
                  0
                  Then they should have been aware of this.
                  1. Dooplet11
                    Dooplet11 12 January 2018 10: 33 New
                    0
                    Then they should have been aware of this.
                    About the results of blowing Me-163 to M = 0,91? For the first time I hear from you. Where did the information come from?
                    1. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 13 January 2018 12: 39 New
                      0
                      From correspondence with Aviator_om here. From there, that smart people first purge something if there is such an opportunity. Although then in flight there may be surprises.
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 13 January 2018 15: 11 New
                        0
                        The key here is "if there is an opportunity." If it were, then the slit wing on the Me-163 would appear immediately, without incident with the dive of an experimental machine.
                    2. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 15 January 2018 02: 13 New
                      0
                      The key here is that the Germans had it. Without it, changes would be introduced for a long time or abandoned as a Bi-2, which was with a straight wing and no tail. And the FW-190 didn’t dive so well.
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 16 January 2018 14: 37 New
                        0
                        Where was What size? What is the limit M?
                    3. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 17 January 2018 04: 53 New
                      0
                      for example, in the same place where the "T-107" (see above what Aviator wrote)
                  2. Dooplet11
                    Dooplet11 13 January 2018 15: 12 New
                    0
                    We weren’t taught such nonsense.
                    1. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 15 January 2018 02: 10 New
                      0
                      You were taught nonsense that the crests are good.
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 16 January 2018 14: 45 New
                        0
                        We were taught what they are for. Which + and - give.
                    2. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 17 January 2018 04: 54 New
                      0
                      Actually because of what. Do you have something against the fact that "The aerodynamic wing comb is like a crutch for a person - a healthy person does not need it"?
    2. Dooplet11
      Dooplet11 11 January 2018 13: 04 New
      0
      No, it doesn’t lie and does not juggle facts. He just owns such a level of knowledge. Victim of Google and the exam. It is necessary to help a person to the extent possible and to deceive his delusions.
      1. Dalailama
        Dalailama 11 January 2018 14: 29 New
        0
        Please debunk the comment above, at least in the part of Me-163 with 0,91
        1. Dooplet11
          Dooplet11 11 January 2018 14: 50 New
          0
          Which one? What did he purge on M = 0,91? Or that flew on M = 0,91?
          On M ~ 0,9 and FV-190 flew. On dive trials. Rights, deduced from this dive with great difficulty. Want to show a scan report on the test report? But this does not mean that the PV-190 is also purged in the pipe at M = 0,9.
          1. Dalailama
            Dalailama 12 January 2018 07: 30 New
            0
            About 0.9 M on pickup FW-190 is to "Aviator_" he does not agree with this here. Just be careful, he has written in his diploma. Also offered to read different books.
            It normally came out of a dive, and did not fall back there with his nose like Bi-2. And Me-163 with swept without crests did not fall, it could be for a reason.
            1. Dooplet11
              Dooplet11 12 January 2018 10: 47 New
              0
              Derived normally from a dive,
              At 0,9M speed? What do you think is a normal conclusion? Why, according to the test results, the maximum Focky dive speed was limited in the RLE by a speed much lower than M = 0,9?
              It normally came out of a dive, and did not fall back there with his nose like Bi-2. And Me-163 with swept without crests did not fall, it could be for a reason.

              Not quite normal. And at first he was dragged into a dive:
              "The main problem with achieving high speed was a small fuel supply - only for a few minutes of motor flight. This allowed the aircraft to be dispersed only up to 900 km / h. To save fuel on takeoff, on October 2 1941 Mr. Dittmar towed his Me 163 V4 in tow Bf 110C. At a height of 4000 m, the tug was detached, Dittmar started the engine and showed the speed 998,2 km / h. At this speed (M = 0,84) the effect of air compressibility the plane went into a dive. Dittmar turned off the engine, the plane quickly slowed down and again became manageable. Details of this flight were immediately sent to the Ministry of Aviation, but most officials refused to believe in such a high flight speed. "
              It began to be displayed. But not just like that it was decided:
              “It was found that the loss of stability of the Me163 V4, which led to uncontrolled diving, was the result of using a wing similar to DFS 194, at the tip of which a flow stall occurred at a critical Mach number. Compared to the DFS 194 wing, the wing on Me 163A was shortened to 9,3 m (with a total length of 5,6 m) and had a sweep of 27 at the base and 32 at the ends (DFS wing 194 had a sweep at the base of 19 and 27 at the ends). The sweep of the trailing edge of the wing was XNUMMg X. wing has been changed. The leading edge became constant - 6gr., and the sweep along the trailing edge was reduced.

              To avoid stalling at high speeds, special fixed “C” slats designed by Hubert were installed. They occupied 40% of the wing span - just before the aileron. Slats gave only 2,5% of additional air resistance, for which they excluded pulling Me.163 into a dive. "The wing ceased to be smooth and became slit.
              Data from here: http://www.brazd.ru/brazdme163.html
              1. Dalailama
                Dalailama 13 January 2018 12: 46 New
                0
                And so that there wouldn’t be any questions why German planes could do so and there weren’t, the tactical technique of avoiding the F-51 was not mastered.
                https://topwar.ru/109492-istrebitel-me163-komet-v
                -rukah-pobediteley.html
                in Germany they didn’t do this, finding out at the same time that the tailings glued with pieces of paper had a small margin of stability.
                And how did you find out about the breakdown? and how the slats were first blown.
                The maximum speed of Me-163 is 1130 km / h (M = 0.92)
                1. Dooplet11
                  Dooplet11 13 January 2018 15: 07 New
                  0
                  No questions arose. I know the answers. But from all of what you said, it does not follow that M-163 was purged on M = 0.91. And even on 0.8. I’ll open the secret (by the way, it’s mentioned in the link that I gave). The issue of slats and stall was not decided in the full-size pipe, but by blowing the wing model and then at the speed of 0.8M in the model pipe in Augsburg. WHOLE ME - 163 on such a Mach was not purged. Even the Americans at NASA at 1947 could only investigate the wave crisis on models. Explore the matter more deeply, rather than jumping over the top in Google.
                  1. Dalailama
                    Dalailama 15 January 2018 02: 16 New
                    0
                    Even the Americans even lagged behind the Germans in aerodynamics. Do not tell me who was then the director of this nasa?
                    1. Dooplet11
                      Dooplet11 16 January 2018 10: 14 New
                      0
                      When is "later" and what is "nasa"?
                      I know "NACA" (to blame, wrote with the error "NASA"), and "NASA".
                      1. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 17 January 2018 04: 56 New
                        0
                        before WWI, after and during WWII, after there was Lippisch and others on this part
    3. Dalailama
      Dalailama 11 January 2018 14: 42 New
      0
      you’re going to be a bunch right now.
      1. Dooplet11
        Dooplet11 11 January 2018 14: 52 New
        0
        A miracle like you is extremely entertaining. Your thought
        A clean wing is when without ridges, with the so-called other comrades, cool.

        Revelation!
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 12 January 2018 07: 31 New
          0
          You did not know about this?
          1. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 12 January 2018 10: 49 New
            0
            About what? Such nonsense was not taught to us. Fortunately.
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 13 January 2018 12: 47 New
              0
              Delirium was just taught once the crests are good and some words are unfamiliar.
              1. Dooplet11
                Dooplet11 13 January 2018 14: 58 New
                0
                In no aerodynamics textbook did he find that "a clean wing is without ridges and with a twist." In general, the definition of what is a "clean wing" in the science of aerodynamics is not found. Maybe in the science of sanitation should have been sought?
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 15 January 2018 02: 18 New
                  0
                  Quote: Dooplet11
                  In general, the definition of what is a "clean wing" in the science of aerodynamics is not found. Maybe in the science of sanitation should have been sought?

                  can
                  1. Dooplet11
                    Dooplet11 15 January 2018 10: 26 New
                    0
                    Woooooooooooooo! So you are not talking about aerodynamics, the thing about the “clean wing”! Well, then I agree. Detergents, the Americans had a clear advantage. They did not spare fragrances in soap.
                    1. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 16 January 2018 01: 11 New
                      0
                      No, with your ideas, competences, plums and blablabla, this is really closer to you.
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 16 January 2018 10: 15 New
                        0
                        So in which textbook to find about the "clean wing"? Or in the course of science?
                    2. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 17 January 2018 04: 57 New
                      0
                      in the same where about clean aerodynamics
    4. Dooplet11
      Dooplet11 13 January 2018 18: 09 New
      0
      This did not pass by the relevant authorities!

      1. Dalailama
        Dalailama 15 January 2018 01: 58 New
        0
        here it is your whole "literature", now in color,
        do not flood, and do not translate the arrows it is the opposite of your fraternity
  16. Dooplet11
    Dooplet11 11 January 2018 14: 45 New
    0
    Dalailama,
    Analogue PTAB-2,5 to do. It did not work out for them cheaply and reliably. Either cheap or reliable.
    Is that your thought ?:
    A clean wing is when without ridges, with the so-called other comrades, cool.

    The deepest knowledge in aerodynamics!
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 12 January 2018 07: 33 New
      0
      And how could they copy the 120mm mortar without a cumulative mine?
      Do not constantly demonstrate the lack of their own.
      1. Dooplet11
        Dooplet11 12 January 2018 10: 52 New
        0
        And how could they copy the 120mm mortar without a cumulative mine?
        Could not. What turned out turned out to be more expensive, and therefore could not be applied en masse over the areas. The parameter price / application efficiency turned out to be "no."
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 13 January 2018 12: 48 New
          0
          How, for example, exactly the same copied PTAB poured in the same way but with the FW-190 could get more expensive?
          1. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 13 January 2018 14: 54 New
            0
            1. So they copied? What they were able to do in terms of cumulative bombs turned out to be harder and more expensive.
            2. And did the PV-190 have bomb bombs in order to pour out peas in the same way? The news, however!
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 15 January 2018 02: 20 New
              0
              The copied cannot be heavier and more expensive, because it will not be different.
              He had suspension units under which they suspend what would pour out, not Su-2, all the same, although also German “Ivanov”.
              1. Dooplet11
                Dooplet11 15 January 2018 10: 31 New
                0
                The copied cannot be heavier and more expensive, because it will not be different.
                If it can be copied in full, and not in a separate part.
                He had suspension units under which they suspended something from which he had enough sleep would

                1. History does not know the concept of "would."
                2. What comes out of, the thing is not simple, it costs money, it has weight and aerodynamic drag.
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 16 January 2018 01: 09 New
                  0
                  And what prevented them from copying completely or did the Germans understand worse in the cumulative part?
                  No more complicated than drop-down PTB. This is for the developers of the Su-2 at the expense of weight, the resistance is eliminated by dropping by emptying.
                  History knows about the creation of myths about the effectiveness or inefficiency of something. So you have the Ju-87 here as an element of the blitzkrieg became ineffective (and obsolete, probably tired and bombing became bad) and the PTAB in bulk were effective, about which almost no one heard about during the USSR. There were probably secret ones, especially from the Germans.
  17. Dooplet11
    Dooplet11 12 January 2018 11: 59 New
    0
    Dalailama,
    DalaiLama Yesterday, 14: 36 ↑
    In the first paragraph, google, then in the second Google can not be trusted.
    Go with your demagogy back to
    https://topwar.ru/131954-kobry-v-zasade.html
    Do not bother to communicate with the officer.

    So I'm just about the fact that you need to google, but you can’t believe everything in a row. It is necessary to evaluate the reliability of the source. Leave here you with your demagogy and leave? Does yours really bother you? Apparently, it’s very useful for you to communicate with an officer. Godik as an ordinary. It will benefit.
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 13 January 2018 12: 08 New
      0
      Several of yours already interfere with each other. Well, then chat with him here too, it will be interesting. What didn't the Aviator start with about the FW-190 dive? It was yours to me, not to him.
      Quote: Dooplet11
      What do you mean by the concept of "wave crisis" and, in your opinion, when does it occur? What does it depend on?

      1. Dooplet11
        Dooplet11 13 January 2018 14: 50 New
        0
        This is mine really to you. But, I am afraid, the answer to the merits of the question is beyond your reach. Therefore, relax!
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 15 January 2018 02: 22 New
          0
          And it was necessary not to me, your colleague wrote about it as well as about the alleged impossibility of diving FW-190 because of it. With the latter, you disagree with him.
  18. Maverick1812
    Maverick1812 12 January 2018 12: 55 New
    0
    The distance is 100 meters, it's just a fuck ** w ...
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 13 January 2018 11: 04 New
      0
      Perhaps the panzer shrek hit 150-200 from the shoulder
  19. Dooplet11
    Dooplet11 12 January 2018 13: 43 New
    0
    About the effectiveness of the FV-190 assault strikes at the end of the war. Eyewitness Account:
    “Six planes were taxied to the launch line. I took off in the 15.30. Five Focke-Wulfs with bombs and missiles hung behind me. The first were for the railway station, and the second for the IS tanks. That was our order. The weather conditions were bad, the bottom edge of the clouds dropped to 300 meters, in some places it was raining and visibility was bad.
    Let's hope that I can find a goal, I thought. “Yes, but how can I dive from the height at which we fly?” I imagine that I will have to sweat a lot to complete this difficult task, and even with these two boys on my tail. Never mind. Everything will be okay".
    We flew quietly and peacefully, following our course to Göding. I had a lot of time to reflect and not to watch the horizon too carefully. I knew the surrounding area from memory and only occasionally looked around to see if enemy fighters showed up. Not a single one was visible.
    An inner voice seemed to warn me:
    “Don't be so stupid. Turn back. We landed and do not listen to anyone. Do you really imagine that with your six “drawers” ​​you can achieve any visible results? On the contrary, there are probably 6000 planes waiting for you in the same sector. Do not be an idiot. You need to get lucky to get out. Turn back, my boy, turn back. Just think. Do you think that someone else in your place would have completed this task? Your two newcomers could barely show the Göding train station on their maps. Only a few months ago, they walked around in the shorts of the Hitler Youth [187], collecting scrap metal. And now they are flying on airplanes that they barely know, and through their windshields they are looking at you as if you are the Lord God. ”
    However, another argument prevailed:
    “If you turn back, Henn, then these two new recruits are doomed. They can never find an airfield. The yaks will intercept and tear them to pieces. Stay where you are - whatever happens. ”
    Then the old voice intervened again:
    “Now you are flying over the railway line somewhere between Wichau [188] and Brno, and it is raining. You can say that the weather was too bad, that you could not see anything. Say what you want, but turn back. You - neither you, nor the other five - will stop the Russian tanks. An IS tank battalion awaits you at the crossroads. You don’t know how many there are. Their driver mechanics will only grin when they see your appearance. ”
    Two opposing opinions. Two personalities fought in me.
    “Listen, coward. Thousands of German soldiers still remain in the Carpathians - infantry divisions with horses and wagons, lacking tanks, artillery and trucks. They will end their journey in Siberia if you do not try to stop the Russian tanks, even for at least a few hours. The IS and T-34 tanks are standing on the platform at the station you need to bomb. They are still on the platform, awaiting a move command. You just have to destroy the station and the main path, so that other tanks could not arrive there for forty-eight hours. Forty-eight hours of deferment for others. Win two days. Two days that will allow the cut-off units to form a front on the Brno - Olmütz [189] - Moravska-Ostrava line and connect with the main forces. Stay where you are and manage your link. You must set an example. This is what you get paid for. Take a look, the weather is improving. Your group leader would not believe you if you blamed the weather for your premature return. Now you have crossed the front line. Turn south to enter the tanks from behind. As soon as you finish the attack, immediately go home at maximum speed. ”
    “Look, there they are. Do you see them? There, near the station, lined up in rows. Great goal, isn't it? Now turn and give orders. You haven't said a word on a two-way communication since you took off. Go ahead and give them instructions. In any case, now you can’t turn back. Too late".
    “You still have time. One minute. Only one minute. ”
    "Attack. The moment has come. ”
    “Come in if you're not a coward.”
    I pressed the transmitter button.
    - The goal is ahead. Do you see her?
    - "Victor" ... we see the goal ... the end of communication.
    - Open up. Get ready for the bombing. Drop bombs, then swoop down behind me and fire your missiles.
    - "Victor" ...
    I looked around, examining heaven and earth.
    - Get away a little from me. Do not stay too close.
    Silence.
    - Got it?
    “Victor.”
    - I'm coming in.
    The Focke-Wulfs dived steeply one after another from a height of 460 meters. I carefully aimed, without a trace of nervousness, as I had done this hundreds of times before. The bomb pulled away from the bomb holder, and I pulled the nose of the plane up.
    Suddenly, my legs tore off the rudder pedals and threw to the body. My knees twisted.
    I wanted to scream.
    Bam! Bam! Bam!
    Hits in the fuselage and windshield - rain of flashes. I fell forward on the control stick. Black spots and red circles danced in front of my eyes, and I lost consciousness.
    Voice in my headphones:
    - Level up, Herr Lieutenant. Line up. Forest ... forest.
    I instinctively pulled the control handle, leveled the car and opened my eyes.
    - Level up, Herr Lieutenant.
    I crawled in my chair. Both my hands gripped the control knob and acted. I had enough time to see the car buckle, and then a voice came through the headphones again:
    “Herr Lieutenant ... Herr Lieutenant ... rear planes shot down by anti-aircraft artillery.” They fell to the station with their bombs. Below us is a sea of ​​fire. There are only three of us left. What should we do?
    I tried to answer, but I had no strength to open my mouth. I could not even reach the transmitter button on the control handle. These two newcomers left and right from time to time let out lines, covering me as they could ... and approaching me.
    - What's the matter? Are you hurt
    .
    Looking down, I saw a field, a flat green strip of land. I did not know that in this place the Red Army had wedged itself into our positions and that I was sinking into Russian territory. I moved the throttle lever back.
    Two of my guys started shooting at targets that I could not see.
    Once again I heard their voices on a two-way communication:
    - What happened?
    I had to sit down ... "
    Peter Henn, The Last Battle "
    All efficiency comes down to "sell your life more expensive."
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 13 January 2018 11: 38 New
      0
      Wrote it for the sake of diving? In horizontal flight at low altitude, it’s easier to bring down an airplane. So re-read it all from the bottom up. The effectiveness of the assault FW-190 below the IL-2 could not be in principle.
      1. Dooplet11
        Dooplet11 13 January 2018 14: 46 New
        0
        This is not for you. Do not strain, analysis of this passage is beyond your power.
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 15 January 2018 02: 25 New
          0
          You cannot afford to ignore the 710 km / h of the assault FW-190, having spoiled 410 on the IL-2.
          1. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 16 January 2018 10: 18 New
            0
            Characteristic Max. speed / height for the assault fock lead? Excerpts from the manual on combat use indicating this speed lead? Otherwise, you will have to ignore this revelation of yours.
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 17 January 2018 04: 59 New
              0
              the rate of fire was at least three times higher, as was the fabulous ammunition.
              One can’t ignore the fact that the FW-190 could first break through and then get away from the fighters, but the IL-2 - no.
  20. NF68
    NF68 12 January 2018 16: 18 New
    0
    Quote: Dooplet11
    You should not do this. I'm afraid DalaiLama will not adequately perceive such a volume of text with numbers and terms. sad


    What is there to understand? Everything is described in sufficient detail and at the same time without unnecessary "subtleties".
    1. Dooplet11
      Dooplet11 12 January 2018 16: 36 New
      0
      A person does not understand the difference between “knock down” and “incapacitate,” a priori considers the collimator sight to be “bomb”, he has “A clean wing is when without crests, with the so-called other comrades, the twist”, the “flashlight higher” is the main the parameter of the ability to take lead on a turn, in general, there is such a mess in the head that it is better to operate with comics, but he does not always appropriately perceive them. And you with such a towel of numbers! laughing
    2. Dalailama
      Dalailama 13 January 2018 11: 32 New
      0
      Here you can still see how this learned to smoke humpback sculpts
      https://topwar.ru/131954-kobry-v-zasade.html
      for example, at first through the collimator it was suggested that the pilot look “around the corner” according to a cunning scheme, then he began to cheat with greyhounds from the cockpit.
      1. Dooplet11
        Dooplet11 13 January 2018 14: 43 New
        0
        So I’m saying that you can’t afford to evaluate the presented materials. You perceive the scope cone visibility scheme as “looking around the corner”, comparing the advantages of the review using multi-angle photo by eye, while declaring the comparison according to the drawing without any arguments a muggle. And there are two options. Either you are really mentally limited in the perception and evaluation of the material, or you intentionally cheat. Anyway, thanks for the link here. The public will be able to evaluate and on other branches the degree of your competence.
        1. shuravi
          shuravi 15 January 2018 02: 16 New
          +1
          Quote: Dooplet11
          So I’m saying that you can’t afford to evaluate the presented materials. You perceive the scope cone visibility scheme as “looking around the corner”, comparing the advantages of the review using multi-angle photo by eye, while declaring the comparison according to the drawing without any arguments a muggle. And there are two options. Either you are really mentally limited in the perception and evaluation of the material, or you intentionally cheat. Anyway, thanks for the link here. The public will be able to evaluate and on other branches the degree of your competence.


          So this newfound Hitler Agent has a completely different task.
          1. Dalailama
            Dalailama 15 January 2018 04: 12 New
            0
            please come here closer to the end, and explain to your friend what it means to lay shells for yourself
            https://topwar.ru/131954-kobry-v-zasade.html
          2. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 15 January 2018 10: 12 New
            +1
            Sometimes it becomes a pity that the administration cannot, in the modern language, "ban such instances of obvious flood, trolling and dissemination of knowingly false information." But, on the other hand, sometimes it’s fun to read the nonsense carried by these instances and to replenish with this nonsense a piggy bank of pearls and examples of ignorance.
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 16 January 2018 01: 23 New
              0
              Your unsuccessful wrecking company has already begun to hand out stamps and bring an ideological base?
              Something a little of their advantages put to you.
              1. Dooplet11
                Dooplet11 16 January 2018 06: 35 New
                0
                For us, the pros are not the goal. And for you? Do you want all your posts? Will it increase their content?
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 17 January 2018 05: 00 New
                  0
                  for you, the goal is to fool people, so that they don’t come to their senses.
          3. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 15 January 2018 10: 35 New
            0
            So this newfound Hitler Agent has a completely different task.

            But to argue with you, the officer, his pride amuses. Even asks not to interfere with your listening. But judging by his answers to you, he not only does not understand me, and you too. The case seems hopeless, a colleague! wink
            1. Dooplet11
              Dooplet11 15 January 2018 13: 28 New
              0
              In 1999, Justin Krueger and David Dunning put forward and then experimentally confirmed the hypothesis of a psychological phenomenon that was ultimately named after the authors. The essence of the phenomenon is that people who have a low level of knowledge in the subject area (competence) make erroneous conclusions. And since the low level of competence does not allow them to sort out their own mistakes on their own, they consider their opinion to be the ultimate truth. No scientifically reasoned argument will force them to change their mind.

              https://topwar.ru/133605-sindrom-danninga-kryuger
              av-svete-voprosa-ob-istorii-oruzhiya.html
              1. Dalailama
                Dalailama 16 January 2018 00: 59 New
                0
                They answered you there.
                There is still a common syndrome when mania spoil and turn upside down everything is absolute. He was well treated in 1937.
            2. shuravi
              shuravi 15 January 2018 22: 02 New
              +2
              Quote: Dooplet11
              But judging by his answers to you, he not only does not understand me, and you too. The case seems hopeless, a colleague! wink


              That's for sure. But these boys cheerfully accept a similar video.
              Pay attention to the gaps. 37 mm shells explode so that NAR C-24, caliber 240 mm nervously smokes to the side.
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cU6OK1zSxKg

              The second video. When I saw it for the first time, it pained my acquaintances and relatives with such pain.
              The artillery shell hurts for a long time, and it is too straightforward and trembles on the trajectory. But at 10 second the video is the answer.
              The characteristic spiral of incorporating ATGMs into the trajectory is clearly visible. No other ammunition is capable of this.
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccOXrfBZoLE
              1. Dalailama
                Dalailama 16 January 2018 01: 26 New
                0
                In the first video at the very beginning, what's wrong? If the target is lightly armored, you can board. And not for a long time and does not tremble, he could get into the shot at the target - the gun’s muzzle is not visible.
                1. Dooplet11
                  Dooplet11 16 January 2018 06: 21 New
                  0
                  Do not bother to talk to officers, please, dear Buddhist!
                  Do not about the "muzzle"!
                  1. Dalailama
                    Dalailama 17 January 2018 05: 01 New
                    0
                    Well, you were talking something about me here.
                    Why not?
                    1. Dooplet11
                      Dooplet11 18 January 2018 11: 45 New
                      0
                      Because the gun has a barrel. Wiki:
                      The barrel is the front end, the outlet of the barrel of a firearm. In the technical literature, as a rule, this term is not used. Terms Used "Outlet" and "muzzle cut."
                      Even if you use an illiterate "muzzle", then the muzzle section and the exit hole will not fall into the frame of the machine gun. The bird can be seen by flight, the swimmer by stroke, the runner by jerk, the "specialist" by conversation.
                      1. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 18 January 2018 17: 30 New
                        0
                        Quote: Dooplet11
                        The barrel is the front end

                        this is not a muzzle hole. So shorter.
                        What, again, is your "specialist" problem in viewing angles. Are you afraid of drafts? Very often, the hole cannot be seen from the front as the arrester will interfere.
              2. Dooplet11
                Dooplet11 16 January 2018 09: 49 New
                0
                Pay attention to the gaps. 37 mm shells explode so that NAR C-24, caliber 240 mm nervously smokes to the side.
                Based on the size of the target (tank ~ 5м, armored boat `20м), the cloud of clouds and water fountains are not very large. But not small.
                The second video. When I saw it for the first time, it pained my acquaintances and relatives with such pain.
                The artillery shell hurts for a long time, and it is too straightforward and trembles on the trajectory. But at 10 second the video is the answer.
                The characteristic spiral of incorporating ATGMs into the trajectory is clearly visible. No other ammunition is capable of this.
                Here I think it is necessary to take into account two aspects.
                1. This is not the original recording, but the video after processing. Not the fact that the original frame rate is preserved and there is no slowdown.
                2. The “oscillations” of the tracers and the spiral are, it seems to me, the result of platform oscillations (the plane makes damped oscillations after a shot) and the camera’s exposure time. The same hooks are observed on the ganks when firing at air targets.
                How would you rate the dive angle in these videos? Far from the "cool dive", do not you?
                1. Dooplet11
                  Dooplet11 16 January 2018 10: 01 New
                  0
                  Yes, about the 10 second. I generally doubt (judging by the number of shots, the size of the tracers and the size of the gaps) that this is 37mm. At the end of the video, on the slowdown (where is the question "KV-1?") Is clearly visible. Can you compare with previous tracks about "T-34?" and "unknown tank".
                2. shuravi
                  shuravi 16 January 2018 10: 22 New
                  0
                  Quote: Dooplet11
                  Based on the size of the target (tank ~ 5м, armored boat & # 96; 20м), the cloud of clouds and water fountains are not very large. But not small.



                  For comparison, an explosion of explosive comparable in charge to an 37 mm RGD-5 grenade shell in water.
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9te8WT2vdI


                  Here I think it is necessary to take into account two aspects.
                  1. This is not the original recording, but the video after processing. Not the fact that the original frame rate is preserved and there is no slowdown.
                  2. The “oscillations” of the tracers and the spiral are, it seems to me, the result of platform oscillations (the plane makes damped oscillations after a shot) and the camera’s exposure time. The same hooks are observed on the ganks when firing at air targets.
                  How would you rate the dive angle in these videos? Far from the "cool dive", do not you?


                  When you have experience of aerial shooting from RS, SD, cannons, you can’t confuse one with the other. And there it is too much that it is the use of fossils, from the moment of launch to the explosion.
                  This is a remake, molded from parts of the old chronicle, and modern. Moreover, everything is cobbled together rather clumsily.
                  1. Dooplet11
                    Dooplet11 16 January 2018 10: 57 New
                    0
                    Perhaps you `re right.
                    For comparison, an explosion of explosive comparable in charge to an 37 mm RGD-5 grenade shell in water.

                    I agree. Such a comparison will be indicative of the difference in result. No hit videos modern BZT 37mm for soil and water from airguns? To remove all doubts.
                    1. shuravi
                      shuravi 16 January 2018 11: 23 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Dooplet11
                      . No hit videos modern BZT 37mm for soil and water from airguns? To remove all doubts.


                      In aviation, now the maximum caliber of guns, 30 mm. No more sense.
                      Yes, and why, on YouTube you can find a lot of video shooting C-5. And there the caliber is even more than 56 mm. However, gaps are negligible.
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 16 January 2018 14: 12 New
                        0
                        Colleague!
                        Found a video of the shooting of the American anti-tank M3
                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=24&am
                        p; v = utaE6cRcgzY
                        Screenshot:
                        If we proceed from the width of the road on the other side of the lake in 6m, then the size of the projectile gap is no less. The question remains, is it a mine or an armor-piercing blank? The tip of the shell seems black.
                      2. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 17 January 2018 05: 28 New
                        0
                        Quote: shuravi
                        In aviation, now the maximum caliber of guns, 30 mm. No more sense.

                        Previously, on the tiny MiG-15, why was it at 37mm?
                        Quote: shuravi
                        For comparison, an explosion of explosive comparable in charge to an 37 mm RGD-5 grenade shell in water.

                        Did the 37mm armor-piercing projectile contain explosives? Speed ​​was important there. Congratulations, you are on a par with commentators, just lovely. Even the “Drill” would break from you, not like the brains of those to whom you composted through it through your example with the illustration of F-104G, then referring to the cover of the blue textbook on aerodynamics.
                        So soon the author and his ponies will grow.
        2. Dalailama
          Dalailama 15 January 2018 02: 27 New
          0
          you there according to the forces of the line of sight on the drawing to conduct as you like, she will certainly appreciate it, and then there will be one option.
          1. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 15 January 2018 10: 21 New
            0
            I am able to draw lines of sight as I like, but I follow them according to the instructions and instructions for combat use and in accordance with the drawing and taking into account the flight conditions. Undoubtedly, the public will appreciate this, as well as the fact that you determine the possibilities of a review "by eye" and from various angles of photographs. Write again, then we will summarize your pearls in "The Shnobel instruction on the combat use of the Saber super-plane against the squalor of the MiG-15." I think it’s possible to publish on the web by April 1. The rating is off scale.
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 16 January 2018 01: 19 New
              0
              The instructions and instructions are not the same as you wrote? For flights in a straight line with anticipation shooting. It’s interesting what kind of forward and downward viewing lines you will draw for the F-8 (by the way, without aerodynamic ridges), the latter of which, in addition to such a review, also made weapons deflecting upwards. Not just a deviant wing.
              1. Dooplet11
                Dooplet11 16 January 2018 06: 28 New
                0
                I myself wrote TO and RE.
                In order to understand for what shooting conditions the manual for the combat use of the MiG-15 was written, it must first be read. Judging by your comments, you did not bother to do this. Therefore, I see no reason to expand the discussion area to F-8.
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 17 January 2018 05: 32 New
                  0
                  That's noticeable.
                  In the case of the F-8, it will be difficult to do something because even you want to.
  21. NF68
    NF68 12 January 2018 16: 22 New
    0
    Quote: DalaiLama
    He was usually hung up when attacking bombers, those that were covered from an escort without a container. If he went into a dive, or it could be lost. It’s easier to shoot a cannon container than to lose an entire plane and usually a pilot.


    I did not come across such data at the expense of additional weapons of the D-9 series. Or I just did not pay attention to them.
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 13 January 2018 11: 09 New
      0
      A lot of things were hung under other planes, including jet ones, all the more so it was not necessary to synchronize.
  22. shuravi
    shuravi 16 January 2018 21: 19 New
    +2
    Dooplet11,
    Quote: Dooplet11
    Colleague!
    Found a video of the shooting of the American anti-tank M3
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=24&am
    p; am
    p; am
    p; am
    p; v = utaE6cRcgzY
    Screenshot:
    If we proceed from the width of the road on the other side of the lake in 6m, then the size of the projectile gap is no less. The question remains, is it a mine or an armor-piercing blank? The tip of the shell seems black.



    Well what are you. There is a very small explosion. Like a bush.

    Sorry, the answer is not there, but this forum has a lopsided engine. Surely administrators do not shine with their minds.
    1. Dooplet11
      Dooplet11 17 January 2018 06: 09 New
      0
      Not worth the apology.
      1. Dooplet11
        Dooplet11 17 January 2018 06: 22 New
        0
        You just have to notice for the gentleman from the Buddhist monastery that the speed and other ballistic characteristics at a distance sufficient to break through the armor of the effectiveness of the BZT shell (in our case 400-500m) are almost the same for the BZT and HE shells. The difference in speeds and trajectories affects longer distances. And we will send him to read a training manual on combat use, a section on the operation of the sight and methods of firing.
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 17 January 2018 06: 41 New
          0
          What is this another perversion in order to cover up that the “explosive” in the 37mm BordKanone was tungsten carbide? Well, if in the water, then of course.
          Quote: Dooplet11
          Colleague

          Are you an officer too?
          Read there under the "Cobras in Ambush" at the bottom answered.
          There are still questions about another with lunar syndrome.
          1. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 17 January 2018 12: 27 New
            0
            You did not answer who you are by profession, firstly, it is not polite, and secondly it is difficult to understand what terms and concepts to communicate with you, understandable to a specialist, or understandable to a neophyte.
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 17 January 2018 15: 35 New
              0
              There were no terms other than "officer." So that at least they understood each other.
              1. Dooplet11
                Dooplet11 17 January 2018 15: 50 New
                0
                So who are you by education?
                Judging by this:
                The F-86 had a clean wing, this was his dignity.
                A clean wing is when without ridges, with the so-called other comrades, cool.
                There is a photo with a comb and a slat (you are about F-86)
                This is a vortex generator and not a comb.
                obviously not an aviator.
                And judging by this
                Did the 37mm armor-piercing projectile contain explosives? Speed ​​was important there.
                definitely not a gunsmith.
                Given that you determine the viewing angles by eye from different angles, then you are not an engineer.
                So who are you, MrX?
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 17 January 2018 15: 54 New
                  0
                  You do not know what a vortex generator is and also think that tungsten carbide is explosive?
                  1. Dooplet11
                    Dooplet11 17 January 2018 17: 02 New
                    0
                    Be afraid, I know what a "vortex generator" is. But I never heard from you that there is a "clean wing", and why did the Comb first become a "comb", and then suddenly turn into a "vortex generator" (one excludes the other ?) I didn’t see what you stated "There is a photo with both a comb and a slat" Is it? I know that you will not show, and even guess why. I believe that tungsten carbide is a chemical compound of tungsten, carbon and ceramics.
                    About the 37mm Hartkernmunition shells with the core I read this: "The characteristics of the VK-3.7 gun itself were not very high. It was not possible to repeat the success of the 30-mm composite Hartkernmunition shells with the 37-mm shell. That is, the lightened 405-gram shell, which also had a carbide core made of carbide had a very high initial velocity of √ 1140 m / s, but due to the unsuccessful shape of the projectile due to “zenithic” heredity, its external ballistics was much worse than that of an 30-mm similar projectile and the speed quickly dropped with increasing firing distance. its capacity at a distance of 600 m was 95 mm normal and only 47 mm at an angle 60╟, which was significantly worse than the composite 30-mm MK-103 shells and differed little from the usual 680-gram high-explosive armor-piercing shell of a standard 37xXNNMXB cartridge significantly lower initial speed √ 263 m / s (800 mm normal and 50 mm at an angle 40╟ from 60 meters).

                    It is also worth noting that the effectiveness of the 37-mm composite Hartkernmunition shells strongly depended not only on the angle of the target. Penetration dropped sharply when hit in tanks equipped with additional armored screens of passive protection, which began to be actively used in the second half of the war to protect against cumulative ammunition. And in this case, it was recommended to use conventional high-explosive armor-piercing shells, less sensitive to such an obstacle.

                    The use of VK-3.7 guns from cannon Junkers imposed considerable restrictions on the distance of opening fire. This was due to the cannon installations, separated by 4.4 m from each other and the need to reduce fire at a certain distance. Typically, the information point was between 270 and 750 m. Most often, it was a distance of 400 meters, optimal for acceptable gun performance. In addition, given the hinged trajectory of the 37 mm shells, the guns on the Junkers were located at a slight angle upwards, which also required correction when aiming and the exact distance of firing. As the armor thickness of Soviet tanks increased, the effectiveness of the Ju.87 + VK 3.7 platform steadily decreased, the distance for more or less effective destruction decreased, which required jewelry skill from the pilots. "(Http://www.airwar.ru/weapon/guns/ bk37.html), besides, if I’m not mistaken, the 37mm Hartkernmunition shells did not have a tracer charge. And the tracers are clearly visible on the video. Therefore, your claim about “also think that tungsten carbide is BB?” is somehow off topic.
                    So who are you by education, is it a secret, or are you embarrassed about your diploma?
                    1. Dooplet11
                      Dooplet11 17 January 2018 17: 18 New
                      0
                      But the armor-piercing tracer 37mm BB contained:
                      1. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 18 January 2018 17: 23 New
                        0
                        panzer grenades you know yes, explosives contain
                        You already have a sub-caliber tungsten bolt with penetration that has become worse than iron, and even with non-cumulative explosive. The gun is always more optimal the closer. Between 270 and 750 - half a kilometer, your “colleague” tried to write about 10 times a shorter interval, you really won’t shoot it. The tungsten tracer is not a hindrance. It was about him because he himself, with his speed, will give a burst no less. Smaller bursts are visible farther from the fragments.
                    2. shuravi
                      shuravi 17 January 2018 22: 19 New
                      0
                      Quote: Dooplet11
                      in addition, if I am not mistaken, the 37mm Hartkernmunition shells did not have a tracer charge. And on the video tracers are clearly visible.


                      There is still visible and characteristic of ATGM smoke trail.
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 18 January 2018 12: 58 New
                        0
                        Made a storyboard. The tracer that interests us is red. Green and blue following it. Yellow target.

                        The second frame shows the separation of three fragments from the tracer; on the third or fourth, they disappear (burn out?). What else is interesting. For almost a second storyboard, the angular size of the target DOES NOT CHANGE. the camera is not approaching the target ?! At a speed of 300 km / h (83m = / s) and an initial distance of 500m, the angular target size should have changed by ~ 20%? If the plane dived to the target.
              2. shuravi
                shuravi 17 January 2018 21: 45 New
                +1
                Quote: DalaiLama
                There were no terms other than "officer." So that at least they understood each other.


                Well, so, confirm your competence in aviation? Or are you weak?
                1. Dooplet11
                  Dooplet11 18 January 2018 06: 06 New
                  0
                  This is difficult for him. It’s simpler to say that all of the 100% shells were tungsten carbide core, the Rudel’s victories on 100% have video confirmation and the assault shot from a steep peak. After his “Moving target demolition mark” (about the gyroscopic collimator sight), talk about confirmation competence in the matter is no longer standing.Everything is obvious.
                  1. Dalailama
                    Dalailama 18 January 2018 17: 45 New
                    0
                    Obviously, everything became with your muhlezh about the forward-down review of the F-86 and MiG-15. Or do you still admire mailing lists? Others from where have copied?
                    And it became difficult for you to make the same for F-8, as well as answer three simple questions about F-1, etc.
                    1. Dooplet11
                      Dooplet11 18 January 2018 19: 24 New
                      +1
                      Where is the "muhlezh"?
                      mailing lists
                      - and what's that?
                      And it became difficult for you to make the same for F-8, as well as answer three simple questions about F-1, etc.
                      Not difficult. I'm afraid it’s hard for you to read them. Do you have a liberal arts education?
                      1. svp67
                        svp67 18 January 2018 19: 27 New
                        0
                        Quote: Dooplet11
                        Where

                        An interesting scheme, like I didn’t even think about it before, but if you continue to continue it, then the MiG pilot’s review is worse.
                      2. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 18 January 2018 20: 32 New
                        0
                        they already explained to you there about your mailrush creativity
                        https://topwar.ru/131954-kobry-v-zasade.html#comm
                        ent-id-7779212
                        You answered under that comment, so you read that on these diagrams you didn’t see the real photos of the MiG-15 and F-86 in two projections, and you answered already with the next drawn dregs.
                        It’s hard for you to get out. When you started talking about F-1 engines and rockets, instead of answering, you started in response to "tanks."
                        https://topwar.ru/133605-sindrom-danninga-kryuger
                        av-svete-voprosa-ob-istorii-oruzhiya.html # commen
                        t-id-7775558
                        I can repeat the review here:
                        Quote: DalaiLama

                        0
                        DalaiLama Yesterday, 06: 06 ↑
                        It was not about comparative, answering the mail is your everything.
                        The upper scheme does not correspond to the Saber of the lower one, on which the machine is aligned, the pilot sits correctly and, therefore, his nose is trimmed on the lower one. The line in the upper diagram is again drawn through the end of the side glazing. In the photo at the bottom right of the MiG with an open lamp without a bow and it is placed higher as the pilot himself.
                        F-86's forehead glazing was lower than the lateral corners of the visor's binding, the edge of the nose was barely visible. The edge of the nose on the MiG was better visible, because it closed the review down and blinded his eyes. Especially those who were not "encore."
                        http://oruzhie.info/images/mig-15-istrebitel/d324
                        b_ac03cd4_orig.jpg

                        Compare for these: glazing, cabin headroom and bevel
                        https://radikal.ru/lfp/s16.radikal.ru/i190/1004/f
                        9 / ad31159d5cd7.jpg / htm

                        the pitch at the Saber there is a little more than the instant, but it doesn’t matter here.
                        That is, if the moving target drift mark on the target goes down and to the side, then the eye should also move under the dashboard?
                        This is a concept. I repeat about the sight - its "upper edge may be just a little higher than the eyes of the pilot."
                        This medicine then did not yet know about the anti-overload suit, and how to make sure that without it the internal organs would not move and the blood would drain less from the head.
                      3. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 18 January 2018 20: 36 New
                        0

                        general view of the F-86 and MiG-15
                      4. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 18 January 2018 20: 43 New
                        0
                        https://radikal.ru/lfp/s16.radikal.ru/i190/1004/f
                        9 / ad31159d5cd7.jpg
                        side view of both on take-off, where real viewing angles are clearly visible.
                        the first photo was needed to take into account the fact that the f-86 windshield is below the side corners of the cabin goby
                2. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 18 January 2018 16: 43 New
                  0
                  You have already confirmed yours with Drill. Search for the word “drill” on this page.
                  In matters of the use of bomber and attack aircraft in the Second World War, it is incorrect, as in the types of German aircraft, which is at the elementary school level.
                  What will be your expert opinion on what your "colleague" wrote in
                  https://topwar.ru/131954-kobry-v-zasade.html
                  anyway, he brought it here already.
                  At the beginning of the Second World War, the Germans had only a couple of battlefield planes - IB Me-109 and a dive aircraft (first with bombs, then with cannons),
                  https://youtu.be/eUVRPqExXKA?t=98
                  a large bomb in the distance and the usual transmission failure on the road at once for three light tanks of this type
                  https://youtu.be/eUVRPqExXKA?t=242
                  tank destruction by bombing
                  And the magic pill that helped to do all this.
                  https://youtu.be/Gjf6TQw58ac?t=174
                  FW-190 in the assault version was added later. Then Henschel. If medium and heavy tanks were hit by a cannon to the side and not to the roof from a dive, then such 37mm gondolas would be hung on the FW-190. For attacks on bombers, they carried containers with six guns with a caliber of up to 30 mm, this is on the FW-190D with two more internal ones). At low altitudes, the assault usually has a smaller number and caliber, but not by much.
                  1. Dooplet11
                    Dooplet11 18 January 2018 19: 28 New
                    0
                    Do you have an aviation education? Answer, do not be shy! I answered a similar question to you! wink
                    1. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 18 January 2018 20: 45 New
                      0
                      Full videos on the links hesitate to see, no? and how many times? did the sound go quieter or vice versa louder?
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 18 January 2018 20: 48 New
                        0
                        Do you have an aviation education? Answer, do not be shy! I answered a similar question to you!
                        I watched the video. Shooting Stuck with 37mm from a steep peak did not see. Will you find?
                    2. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 18 January 2018 21: 06 New
                      0
                      Have you seen the bombs? Questions about this, what do you have with your "colleague"?
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 18 January 2018 21: 33 New
                        0
                        I saw with bombs. There are no questions about bombs. Question to your statement that the Assault Stuck with 37mm shot from a steep dive. Is there such a video?
                    3. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 19 January 2018 03: 19 New
                      0
                      With 60 the hail along the T-34 and Is-2 into the roof without a dive was impossible. What could stop her from doing this? With brakes without gondolas and with bombs dived 85 city.
                      1. Dooplet11
                        Dooplet11 19 January 2018 09: 02 New
                        0
                        With 60 the hail along the T-34 and Is-2 into the roof without a dive was impossible. What could stop her from doing this? With brakes without gondolas and with bombs dived 85 city.

                        With bombs dive. And out of the dive no bombs. One could not go out with them. Drawdown, you know, and strength issues.
                        What bothered: Limitations on the parameter flight weight / permissible overload. Plus controllability and stability issues for configuration with 2x37mm VK 3,7.
                        It turns out that
                        With 60 grad on T-34 and Is-2 in the roof without a dive it was impossible
                        and not into the roof, at an angle of diving 10-12 is possible. Accept this fact. Or show the video with the attack of the Assault Pieces on a steep dive. But you will not show. Again, the video with the bombs "palm off."
                    4. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 20 January 2018 22: 39 New
                      0
                      Bombs were not dropped all at once in one dive. Dive with bombs was 85, with gondolas only 60 degrees.
                      Nothing got in the way. About 10-12 in your source it was written about G-1, at the front there were G-2.
                      You’re already doing some cannon storyboards here and do it.
                      the bomb video was because your “colleague” did not consider an ordinary dive aircraft to be an anti-tank aircraft.
  23. Dooplet11
    Dooplet11 18 January 2018 19: 58 New
    0
    Dalailama,
    panzer grenades you know yes, explosives contain
    You already have a sub-caliber tungsten bolt with penetration that has become worse than iron, and even with non-cumulative explosive. The gun is always more optimal the closer. Between 270 and 750 - half a kilometer, your “colleague” tried to write about 10 times a shorter interval, you really won’t shoot it. The tungsten tracer is not a hindrance. It was about him because he himself, with his speed, will give a burst no less. Smaller bursts are visible farther from the fragments.


    Not with me. On tests at the Air Force Research Institute and the State Aviation Technical University. Between 270 and 750 five seconds of flight. The tracer is not a hindrance. It seems to be NOT at "tungsten". And on the video TRACERS. Maybe not “tungsten” flies with a tracer “? Fragments from the“ tungsten? ”Collapsed on impact with water? Logically. laughing
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 18 January 2018 20: 47 New
      0
      should a German pilot not see where his American tungsten obtained through Portugal from Lendliz flies? Shards of armor can not be on the water from hitting the target of tungsten?
  24. Dooplet11
    Dooplet11 18 January 2018 20: 04 New
    0
    svp67,
    An interesting scheme, like I didn’t even think about it before, but if you continue to continue it, then the MiG pilot’s review is worse.
    The Dalai Lama discussed the issue of a forward-down review. But you can continue.
    1. There were no complaints about the "back straight-up" from the MIG pilots.
    2. Sit on a chair and turn back and forth. Will the center of the head remain at the same point in the chair, or will it move sideways? This heading will not give blind spots when looking back.
  25. Dooplet11
    Dooplet11 18 January 2018 20: 42 New
    0
    Dalailama,
    F-86's forehead glazing was lower than the lateral corners of the visor's binding, the edge of the nose was barely visible. The edge of the nose on the MiG was better visible, because it closed the review down and blinded his eyes. Especially those who were not "encore."


    And this is generally an epic:
    "Moving target drift mark" Where do you read this terminology?
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 18 January 2018 21: 03 New
      0
      They answered you there too, with a proposal to enlarge the first photo, and with the fact that you have a drawing again in the lower right. And you saw the answer about this again.
      https://topwar.ru/131954-kobry-v-zasade.html#comm
      ent-id-7781471
      1. Dooplet11
        Dooplet11 18 January 2018 21: 23 New
        0
        bottom right you have a drawing again
        Sectional drawing, bottom right. Brought to a single scale. Drawing, - a drawing made in compliance with the proportions and sizes according to a given standard of designations and display techniques. Did you not know?
        Yes, you are already relaxing.
        "The F-86 had a clean wing, that was its virtue.
        A clean wing is when without ridges, with the so-called other comrades, cool.
        There is a photo of the F-86 with both a comb and a slat.
        This is a vortex generator and not a comb. From the Saber it was better to aim, because the lantern is higher and the nose is more oblique. This is obvious from any photo. Moving target drift mark on the target goes down and to the side. "(C) Dalai Lama.
        "Aim demolition mark" finally convinced me. You are absolutely right in these definitions. This is how the world works. Amen!
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 19 January 2018 03: 22 New
          0
          At the bottom right, you have a poor quality picture from a computer game.
          Are you able to distinguish a vortex generator from the proletarian ridge on the MiG-19?
          1. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 19 January 2018 08: 41 New
            0
            In the bottom right, a sectional drawing of Saber. Where from? From google. Image resolution - yes, not really. But enough to "put the pilot" in the drawings at the top right and top left, bringing them to a single scale.
            The vortex generator from the proletarian ridge on the MiG-19 are able to distinguish

            In those cases when the "proletarian crest of the MiG-19" becomes a vortex generator, then I am afraid you will not be able to. But can you understand such a logical construction ?: The vortex generator may be a non-comb. The comb may be a vortex generator. Or is it better for you to depict this in the form of a logical matrix? Although, you do not like comics .... ((((
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 20 January 2018 22: 31 New
              0
              bottom right not drawing, rough computer picture (in this thread)
              are you confusing right and left?
              Why did the attempts to cancel the general trend of improving forward-down visibility on airplanes through their tricks preemptively through the sight stop?
  26. Dalailama
    Dalailama 18 January 2018 20: 44 New
    0
    svp67,
    nothing interesting, they already explained to him on it, he “forgot” and “did not understand”, and on a new
    https://topwar.ru/131954-kobry-v-zasade.html#comm
    ent-id-7779212
    comrade has to argue that the review from the MiG-15 was better than from the F-86 with a more prominent flashlight and beveled nose.
    has a lot more
    1. Dooplet11
      Dooplet11 18 January 2018 20: 54 New
      0
      Do you have a technical background? Discover the secret! Where are you taught this ?:
      moving target drift mark

      And this ?:
      A clean wing is without a crest and with a twist
      1. Dalailama
        Dalailama 18 January 2018 21: 04 New
        0
        Why? Do you look at real photos normally?
        It is strange that you have not been taught this.
        1. Dooplet11
          Dooplet11 18 January 2018 21: 09 New
          0
          What
          to this:
          moving target drift mark
          A clean wing is without a crest and with a twist

          What's your education?
          1. shuravi
            shuravi 18 January 2018 23: 04 New
            0
            Quote: Dooplet11
            What
            to this:
            moving target drift mark
            A clean wing is without a crest and with a twist

            What's your education?


            Before, he had already stated above that La-7 was all-metal. laughing
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 19 January 2018 03: 14 New
              0
              metal went first to asam
            2. Dooplet11
              Dooplet11 19 January 2018 08: 45 New
              0
              Before, he had already stated above that La-7 was all-metal. laughing

              At Genossa, La-5FN, La-7 and La-9 / 11 were imprinted in one memory cell. Apparently, from data bus overload. Or from problems with the RAM. It remains to sympathize with his surroundings. But how is it fun with him! You can replenish the joke box of jokes.
              1. shuravi
                shuravi 19 January 2018 19: 22 New
                +1
                Quote: Dooplet11
                Before, he had already stated above that La-7 was all-metal. laughing

                At Genossa, La-5FN, La-7 and La-9 / 11 were imprinted in one memory cell. Apparently, from data bus overload. Or from problems with the RAM. It remains to sympathize with his surroundings. But how is it fun with him! You can replenish the joke box of jokes.



                He has a soldier complex with TK.
                Just imagine, an airfield, a smoking room. Pilots discuss the results of work at the training ground. And then a soldier from a tanker comes up and starts to teach.
                Is funny Of course, if in real life, but on the Internet, it is very close.
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 20 January 2018 22: 33 New
                  0
                  Really funny, especially when you reread the entire long branch. Did you fly and bomb on IL-2 or Ju-87 or on Mi-24?
                  1. shuravi
                    shuravi 21 January 2018 22: 06 New
                    0
                    Quote: DalaiLama
                    Really funny, especially when you reread the entire long branch. Did you fly and bomb on IL-2 or Ju-87 or on Mi-24?



                    Boy, I flew and threw bombs with Mi-24. You have no idea about this process at all. bully
                    1. Dalailama
                      Dalailama 22 January 2018 10: 01 New
                      0
                      You are here about the use of PTAB with IL-2, FW-190 (which is not an IB), the use of Ju-87 dive bombers, and you made a mistake about the drill.
          2. Dalailama
            Dalailama 19 January 2018 03: 15 New
            0
            Which allows you to ask such questions that you and your are not able to answer
            https://topwar.ru/133605-sindrom-danninga-kryuger
            av-svete-voprosa-ob-istorii-oruzhiya.html # commen
            t-id-7786451
            1. Dooplet11
              Dooplet11 19 January 2018 08: 48 New
              0
              Sometimes children ask questions that even God cannot answer. Where are we with our higher Soviet?
              1. Dalailama
                Dalailama 20 January 2018 22: 33 New
                0
                they have already answered for you, so it will be clear even to the child.
              2. shuravi
                shuravi 6 February 2018 14: 54 New
                0
                Quote: Dooplet11
                Sometimes children ask questions that even God cannot answer. Where are we with our higher Soviet?


                Well, this child except in the speed of flooding succeeded. The rest is alas. laughing
  27. Dooplet11
    Dooplet11 19 January 2018 12: 15 New
    0
    Dalailama,
    ("Muzzle") This is not a muzzle hole. So shorter.
    What, again, is your "specialist" problem in viewing angles. Are you afraid of drafts? Very often, the hole cannot be seen from the front as the arrester will interfere.

    You have problems with terms and definitions. And in viewing angles, and in aerodynamics, and in weapon systems. In no way do your terms agree with generally accepted ones. Maybe, for starters, to learn terminology, and then try to express their thoughts? Otherwise, you risk being chronically misunderstood. I am sorry for you. This energy, but in the right direction!
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 20 January 2018 22: 36 New
      0
      Quote: Dooplet11
      The barrel is the front end

      The problem is you first read what you quote, "usually" - this does not mean that it is not used