Soviet aviation anti-tank weapons of the period of the Second World War

69
Soviet aviation anti-tank weapons of the period of the Second World War

By the beginning of World War II, short-range bombers and attack aircraft, designed to operate along the front line and rear of the enemy, in addition to other tasks, were assigned to fight against enemy armored vehicles. At the same time, at the initial stage of hostilities for these aircraft, there was no truly effective specialized anti-tank weapons.

Aviation artillery armament


By the time Germany attacked the USSR, our aviation there were two types of aircraft guns: 20-mm ShVAK (Shpitalny-Vladimirov aviation large-caliber), the design of which was in many respects similar to the 7,62-mm ShKAS aircraft machine gun and 23-mm VYa (Volkova-Yartseva). These 20-23 mm guns could only penetrate the protection of vehicles covered with bulletproof armor, and shells of this caliber had a low armor effect. An increase in the caliber of aircraft guns to 37–45 mm theoretically made it possible to deal with medium tanks and with some luck - even with heavy ones.



The most massive Soviet aircraft gun of the period of World War II is the 20-mm ShVAK. In terms of its design, the ShVAK was completely similar to the large-caliber 12,7-mm machine gun of the same name, which entered service in 1936. The difference was only in caliber and ammunition. On serial fighters, 20-mm guns began to be installed in 1939. The 20-mm ShVAK cannon was produced in versions: wing-mounted, turret-mounted, and as a motor-gun.


20-mm ShVAK cannon in the wing of the I-16 fighter

Synchronous and wing-mounted 20 mm guns were installed on Soviet fighters I-153P, I-16, Yak-1, Yak-3, Yak-7B, LaGG-3, La-5, La-7, Pe-3. On the part of the British Hurricane fighters delivered to the USSR, rifle-caliber machine guns were replaced with 20-mm cannons.


20 mm ShVAK aircraft gun

The winged version of the ShVAK weighed 40 kg and had a length of 1 mm. Rate of fire - 679-700 rds / min. An armor-piercing incendiary projectile weighing 800 g left the barrel at an initial speed of 96 m/s.

While 20-mm guns performed satisfactorily against enemy aircraft, they proved to be weak against tanks. Shortly after the start of hostilities, it turned out that the armor-piercing 20-mm shell of the ShVAK cannon was capable of penetrating German armor up to 15 mm thick (tanks Pz.II Ausf F, Pz.38 (t) Ausf C, armored personnel carrier Sd Kfz 250) at meeting angles close to to the normal, from a distance of no more than 250–300 m. At meeting angles of 30–40 °, characteristic of an attack from a strafing flight or from a gentle dive, the shells, as a rule, ricocheted.

In 1940, the 23 mm VYa-23 automatic gun was adopted. The recoil of the 23 mm cannon was large enough, and it was not originally installed on fighters. Its only carrier in the initial period of the war was the Il-2 attack aircraft, in each wing of which one VYa cannon was placed with an ammunition load of 150 rounds per barrel. Later, Il-10 attack aircraft and partially LaGG-3 fighters were armed with it. Production aircraft with 23 mm guns began to arrive in August 1941.

With a weight of 66 kg and a length of 2 mm, the gun fired 150–550 rounds per minute. A projectile weighing 650 g had an initial velocity of 200 m/s and pierced 900 mm armor at a distance of 200 m. IL-25, armed with VYa-2 cannons, could hit the armor of light tanks, when attacking the latter from behind or from the side at glide angles up to 23 °.


23 mm aircraft gun VYa

Thus, 20-mm and 23-mm air guns could only effectively deal with armored personnel carriers, armored vehicles and light tanks. In addition, not every armor penetration by a small-caliber projectile, which had a small armor effect, led to the destruction or incapacitation of the tank.

In the fall of 1941, it became obvious that Soviet 20–23 mm caliber aircraft guns were only able to effectively deal with weakly protected vehicles; medium tanks and self-propelled guns were too tough for them. In addition, an increase in the security of enemy armored vehicles was predicted, and in connection with this, the aircraft designer S. V. Ilyushin proposed arming the Il-2 attack aircraft with 14,5-mm machine guns created on the basis of the VYa cannon. However, this proposal did not find support from the Soviet military-political leadership.

The 14,5-mm cartridge with the BS-41 bullet, which used a tungsten carbide core, had the highest armor penetration. At a distance of 300 m, the BS-41 confidently overcame 35 mm armor. However, tungsten carbide, used to make sub-caliber armor-piercing shells, was a scarce material throughout the war. Experts reasonably noted that the consumption of 14,5 mm aviation ammunition would be ten times greater than when firing from anti-tank rifles, and the efficiency was not much higher than when using 23 mm shells.

In the second half of 1942, the Il-2 variant armed with two 37 mm ShFK-37 cannons was released in a small series. This 37-mm aircraft gun was developed under the direction of B. G. Shpitalny.


Il-2 attack aircraft armed with 37 mm ShFK-37 guns

The weight of the ShFK-37 gun with ammunition was 302,5 kg. The rate of fire is approximately 170 rds / min, with an initial projectile speed of 890-900 m / s. The gun ammunition included armor-piercing incendiary tracer and fragmentation incendiary tracer shells.

The BZT-37 projectile ensured the penetration of German tank armor 30 mm thick at an angle of 45 ° to the normal from a distance of no more than 500 m. Armor 15 mm thick was penetrated from distances of no more than 16 m at meeting angles not exceeding 60 °. Fragmentation-incendiary shells had less armor penetration, but when they hit the undercarriage, they often disabled it and could effectively hit external tanks, attachments, gun barrels, optics and sights.

The large dimensions of the PFC-37 cannons and the store supply (the capacity of the 40 projectile shop) determined their placement in the fairing under the wing of the IL-2 aircraft. Because of the installation on the cannon of a large store, it had to be strongly lowered down relative to the building plane of the wing (aircraft axis), which not only complicated the design of attaching the cannon to the wing (the cannon was attached to the shock absorber and moved along with the magazine when firing), but also required it is bulky with a large cross-section fairings.

Tests showed that the flight data of the Il-2 with large-caliber ShFK-37 air guns, compared to the serial Il-2, armed with ShVAK or VYa guns, seriously deteriorated. The aircraft became more inert and more difficult in piloting technique, especially on turns and turns at low altitude. At high speeds, maneuverability deteriorated.

Aimed firing from the ShFK-37 cannons on the Il-2 aircraft was largely difficult due to the strong recoil of the cannons during firing and the non-synchronization in their work. The large spacing of the cannons relative to the center of mass of the aircraft, as well as the insufficient rigidity of the cannon mount, led to the fact that the attack aircraft experienced strong shocks, “pecks” and lost its line of sight when firing. This, in turn, taking into account the insufficient longitudinal stability of the attack aircraft, gave a significant dispersion of shells and a sharp decrease in firing accuracy. It was possible to hit the target with a burst length of no more than 2-3 shots. Shooting from one cannon was completely impossible. The attack aircraft immediately turned in the direction of the firing gun so that it was not possible to correct the aiming. Hitting the target in this case could only be the first projectile.

During the entire time of testing, the ShFK-37 guns worked unreliably - the average percentage of ammunition fired per one failure was only 54%. That is, almost every second sortie on a combat mission of an IL-2 with ShFK-37 guns was accompanied by a failure of at least one of the guns. The maximum bomb load of the attack aircraft decreased and amounted to only 200 kg. All this significantly reduced the combat value of an attack aircraft armed with 37-mm guns.

Despite the failure with ShFK-37, work in this direction was continued. In 1943, the production of the NS-37 air gun began (designers A. E. Nudelman and A. S. Suranov). This gun had a belt feed, thanks to which the rate of fire could be increased to 240–260 rds / min. The initial velocity of the projectile is 810 m / s, the weight of the gun is 171 kg. Thanks to tape power and less weight, it became possible to install a new system not only on attack aircraft, but also on fighters.


37 mm NS-37 aircraft gun

Military tests of the gun were carried out on the LaGG-3 from April 21 to June 7, 1943 on the Kalinin Front and on the Yak-9T from July 22 to August 21, 1943 on the Central Front. In July 1943, tests began on a two-seater Il-2 armed with two 37-mm NS-37 cannons. In total, 96 Il-2s with NS-37 participated in military trials.


Il-2 attack aircraft armed with 37 mm NS-37 guns

Compared to the ShFK-37, the NS-37 air gun was much more compact, more reliable and had a higher rate of fire. Thanks to the tape feed, it was possible to reduce the size and weight of the system, to place the guns directly at the lower surface of the wing. A relatively small fairing was mounted on top of the gun, consisting of two quick-release flaps. The tape with 37-mm shells fit directly into the wing compartment. The weight of one NS-37 with ammunition was a little over 250 kg.

However, as in the case of ShFK-37, the installation of NS-37 guns significantly worsened flight performance and reduced the bomb load. This was due to the large spread of masses along the span of the wing, the significant weight of the guns of the ammunition load and the fairings, which worsened the aerodynamics of the aircraft. The longitudinal stability of attack aircraft with the NS-37 was significantly worse than that of the Il-2, armed with 20–23 mm cannons, which adversely affected the accuracy of fire. As in the case of ShFK-37, aimed shooting from one cannon was completely impossible. Large-caliber aircraft guns had a crushing recoil, which negatively affected the components and assemblies of the aircraft, and the ammunition was small. In order to confidently get from a cannon into a moving tank, the pilot had to have a fairly high qualification.

According to the reports of the pilots and the data of the photo-machine guns, the number of hits on the target for the spent ammunition was approximately 3%, and hits on the tanks were obtained in 43% of the sorties. According to the pilots who participated in the military tests, the Il-2 with 37-mm aircraft guns did not have any special advantages in attacking small targets over an attack aircraft armed with smaller-caliber guns with a normal bomb load and rockets. Taking into account the significant reduction in flight data and bomb load, experts came to the conclusion that the installation of the NS-37 on the Il-2 did not justify itself. In this regard, attack aircraft armed with 37-mm guns were produced very limitedly.

Taking into account the previous negative experience, the mass production of the Il-2, armed with 45-mm cannons, did not come to fruition. Although such an aircraft was built and tested at the end of 1943.


Il-2 attack aircraft armed with 45 mm NS-45 guns

The NS-45 aircraft gun was created on the basis of the NS-37, while maintaining the overall dimensions of the latter. The weight of the NS-45 gun was 150–153 kg. Rate of fire 260–280 rds/min. In the 45-mm aircraft gun NS-45, for the first time in the USSR, a muzzle brake was used on an aircraft, which absorbed up to 85% of the recoil energy.


Comparative sizes of projectiles for 20 mm, 23 mm, 37 mm and 45 mm aircraft guns

In 1944–1945 a total of about 200 guns were produced. The Yak-9K (large-caliber) fighter with the NS-45 in the engine disintegration and 29 rounds of ammunition was designed and built specifically for this gun. A total of 53 aircraft of this type were built.

When designing the Yak-9K, it was assumed that these fighters would be able to destroy groups of enemy bombers from a long distance without entering the range of defensive installations, and successfully hit ground targets.

In the period from August 13 to September 18, 1944, the Yak-9K underwent military trials on the 3rd Belorussian Front and from January 15 to February 15, 1945 on the 2nd Belorussian Front. In the course of combat use, ten 45-mm shells were spent on average per shot down enemy aircraft. However, the tests were actually carried out in "greenhouse conditions", because of the worst maneuverability, the Yak-9K needed to be covered by fighters with 20-mm guns.

Aimed fire from 45-mm cannons was obtained only on the first shot, the rest of the shells flew past. After a burst of three shots, due to strong recoil, the flight speed dropped sharply, the stability of the aircraft was lost, oil and water leaked in the pipelines.

According to the results of military tests, the Yak-9K was not launched into mass production.

Aviation rockets


From the first days of the war until the end of hostilities, Soviet aviation actively used rockets against enemy armored vehicles.


I-153 fighters armed with RS-82 rockets

In June 1941, most of the Soviet fighters could carry 82-mm RS-82 rockets, and Il-2 attack aircraft and Su-2 short-range bombers were also armed with 132-mm RS-132 rockets, up to 8 units.


Il-2 attack aircraft of an early modification on a ski chassis, armed with RS-132 rockets

The suspension of the RS-82 and RS-132 under the planes of the aircraft was carried out on launchers of the "flute" type. The installation of rocket launchers with RS increased firepower, but, due to the large frontal resistance and weight, speed decreased and maneuverability deteriorated.


The RS-82 rocket had a weight of 6,82 kg, a fuel charge of 1,06 kg, the warhead was equipped with 360 g of TNT. When firing at ground targets, the projectile was supplied with an impact fuse. For mounting on the launcher, the projectile had four leading pins, and stabilization in flight was carried out by four stabilizers with a span of 200 mm. The halves of the stabilizer were stamped from tin and interconnected by welding. The assembled stabilizer was attached to the corners on the nozzle fairing.


RS-82 missiles with shock and remote fuses

The RS-132 had a generally similar design, but was larger. The total weight of the rocket was 23,1 kg, of which the fuel charge was 3,78 kg, the explosive charge was 1,9 kg.


The maximum speed of rockets exceeded 350 m / s. The declared firing range of the RS-82 was 5 m, and the RS-200 - 132 m. But in practice, the maximum firing range, even for large area targets, did not exceed 7 m. Due to the significant dispersion of rocket projectiles, the probability of hitting an individual tank was very low.


Models of RS-82 and RS-132 under the wing of Il-2

At firing ranges organized in September 1941 to assess the real combat effectiveness of the RS-82 and RS-132, it turned out that the percentage of hits in a single stationary tank was 1,1%, and in a dense tank column - 3,7%. Shooting was carried out with single shells and a volley of 2, 4 and 8 shells. The greatest performance was obtained with volley fire. Shooting was carried out from a height of 100–400 m, with descent angles of 10–30°. Aiming began from 800 m, and the fire opened from 300–500 m.

In addition, the striking capabilities of the RS-82 and RS-132 combat units left much to be desired. With a direct hit, the RS-82 could disable or destroy German light tanks such as Pz.II Ausf F, Pz.38 (t) Ausf C, as well as the Sd Kfz 250 armored vehicle. The much heavier RS-132 was able to break through the armor of medium tanks Pz.Kpfw. III and Pz.Kpfw. IV. But bursts of 132-mm shells at a distance of more than 1 m from the tank did not cause serious damage.


PC-82 under the wing of the IL-2

Nevertheless, the RS was a very effective weapon against areal (artillery batteries and troop positions) and linearly elongated targets (convoys and trains). In the first months of the war, an optimal tactic was developed for dealing with concentrations of enemy troops. Enemy columns and armored vehicles on the Il-2 march were usually attacked from strafing flight (height of approach to the target 25–35 m) along the column or at an angle of 15–20° to its long side. As a rule, the first blow with rockets and cannons was applied to the head of the column in order to block the movement. The range of opening fire is 500-600 m. Before launching rockets, zeroing was carried out with tracer bullets from ShKAS machine guns. Most often, aiming was carried out "along the column" without choosing a specific target.

In 1941, aviation rockets with an armor-piercing warhead were designed specifically for fighting tanks: RBS-82 and RBS-132. The 82 mm projectile normally penetrated 50 mm thick armor, and the 132 mm projectile pierced 75 mm armor. These shells, created on the basis of the RS-82 and RS-132, had a hardened warhead and increased flight speed.


Drawing rocket RBS-132

Armor-piercing rockets were first successfully used in August 1941. However, their mass production began only in the second half of the war. Despite the improved accuracy and armor penetration, the RBS-82 and RBS-132 rockets did not become an effective means of fighting tanks. Armor penetration was highly dependent on the angle of contact with the armor, and the probability of hitting remained low.

The arsenal of the Il-2 and Il-10 attack aircraft also included the ROFS-132 rocket projectile with improved accuracy of fire compared to the RBS-132 or PC-132. The warhead of the ROFS-132 projectile, with a direct hit, provided through penetration of armor up to 50 mm thick.


Rocket ROFS-132 under the wing of IL-2

When ROFS-132 exploded near the tank at a distance of 1 m, the kinetic energy of the fragments was enough to break through German tank armor 15–20 mm thick. At the same time, ROFS-132 shells did not have the necessary accuracy against individual tanks. The best results of ROFS-132 were given when firing at large area targets: concentrations of troops, convoys, trains, warehouses, batteries of field and anti-aircraft artillery.

In the second half of 1942, RBSK-82 cumulative rockets were tested, which showed armor penetration up to 50 mm along the normal. In most cases, armor penetration was accompanied by metal spalling around the exit hole. The test commission came to the conclusion that low armor penetration is a consequence of the unsatisfactory operation of the fuse, and the formation of a cumulative jet occurred after the deformation of the cone. It was recommended to finalize the fuses and submit shells for re-testing. Due to the fact that mass production of small-sized cumulative bombs began in 1943, RBSK-82 shells were not put into service.

Aviation weapons of incendiary action


In a number of sources devoted to the combat use of the Il-2 in the initial period of World War II, it is said that cassettes filled with glass ampoules or tin capsules with a self-igniting flammable liquid KS (solution of white phosphorus in carbon disulphide) showed good results against German armored vehicles. If the burning liquid flowed into the tank, then it, as a rule, burned out.


ampoule bomb cassette

The Il-2 small bomb cassettes contained more than 200 ampoules, and it turned out to be quite an acceptable probability of being hit when operating on the battle formations of tanks. However, pilots did not like KS ampoules, since their use was associated with a high risk. In the event of a stray bullet or fragment hitting a bomb cluster and even a slight damage to one ampoule, the aircraft was doomed.

Thermite balls, which were equipped with incendiary aerial bombs ZARP-100, did not justify the hopes placed. 100 balls weighing 485 g each or 100 balls weighing 141 g each were placed in a 300-kg aerial bomb. During a ground explosion of an aerial bomb, thermite balls were scattered within a radius of 15 meters, with an air explosion, the scattering radius was 25–30 meters. The combustion products of the thermite mixture, formed at a temperature of about 3 ° C, could well burn through the relatively thin upper armor.

But the fact was that thermite, which had excellent incendiary properties, did not catch fire instantly. It took a few seconds for the thermite ball to ignite. Thermite balls, which did not have time to flare up, in most cases rolled off the armor of the tanks.

They tried to use 50-100-kg aerial bombs filled with white phosphorus against armored vehicles, which gave good results when used on wooden buildings and other non-fire-resistant targets. Granular white phosphorus with a combustion temperature of about 900 ° C, scattered by an expelling charge, burns out quickly enough, and its combustion temperature is not sufficient to burn through the armor. A tank could be destroyed by a direct hit from a phosphorus incendiary bomb, but this rarely happened.

The incendiary bomb ZAB-100-40P had a case made of 8 mm pressed cardboard coated with varnish, and contained 38 kg of thickened gasoline with a phosphorus fuse and a small bursting charge. The greatest effect against the accumulation of tanks was achieved with an air blast at a height of 15–20 m above the ground. When dropped from a height of 200 m, the simplest grater retarder worked. In case of his failure, the bomb was equipped with a percussion fuse.

The effectiveness of the use of air-blasted incendiary bombs was highly dependent on meteorological conditions and the time of year. Also, for optimal air blasting, it was necessary to strictly control the height of the bombs.

Fragmentation, high-explosive and high-explosive aerial bombs


From the first days of the Great Patriotic War, the main aviation weapons used against tanks were fragmentation, high-explosive fragmentation and high-explosive bombs weighing 25–100 kg. A direct hit from such an airborne munition is guaranteed to destroy any enemy tank. With a close gap, the shock wave destroyed welds and rivets, distorted the undercarriage, swept away external attachments, the crew could get shell shock, and heavy high-speed fragments often damaged optical instruments and weapons, and even pierced the side armor.


High-explosive fragmentation 50-kg and fragmentation 25-kg bombs with a direct hit on the tank ensured its unconditional defeat, and with a gap of 1–1,5 m, they penetrated armor 15–20 mm thick. The best results were demonstrated by high-explosive fragmentation OFAB-100 equipped with 30 kg of TNT. When using this bomb on enemy armored vehicles, it was possible to penetrate 40 mm of armor at a distance of 3 m, 30 mm at a distance of 10 m and 15 mm at 15 m from the point of explosion.

Another question is that it was very difficult to hit a single tank with a bomb, and therefore bombing attacks were usually carried out on clusters of armored vehicles. At the same time, the specialized armored attack aircraft Il-2 with a normal bomb load of 400 kg, originally created to fight enemy armored vehicles, did not surpass the Pe-2 bomber in its capabilities. When bombing from a dive, the Pe-2, which had a normal bomb load of 600 kg, bombed more accurately.

HEAT bombs


The most effective weapon used by our combat aircraft against enemy tanks was the cumulative anti-tank bombs (PTAB), which were put into service in 1943. Taking into account the fact that the thickness of the upper armor of the tanks did not exceed 30 mm, it was possible to massively use small-sized bombs with a cumulative warhead.


PTAB-2,5-1,5

The new aviation anti-tank ammunition, designated PTAB-2,5-1,5, was a cumulative anti-tank aviation bomb weighing 1,5 kg in dimensions of 2,5 kg of an aviation fragmentation bomb.


Hulls and riveted stabilizers PTAB-2,5-1,5 were made of sheet steel 0,6 mm thick. For additional fragmentation action, a steel 1,5-mm shirt was put on the cylindrical part of the bomb body. The combat charge consisted of 620 g of TGA mixed explosive (a mixture of TNT, RDX and aluminum powder). To protect the impeller of the AD-A fuse from spontaneous transfer to the combat position, a special fuse was put on the bomb stabilizer from a square-shaped tin plate with a fork of two wire whiskers attached to it, passing between the blades. After dropping the PTAB from the aircraft, it was torn off the bomb by a counter flow of air.


The minimum bomb drop height, which ensures the failure-free operation of the bomb and the leveling of the bomb before it hits the surface of the tank's armor, was 70 m. If ammunition or fuel was encountered along the path of the jet, they detonated and ignited.

Before the enemy was faced with the massive use of PTAB near Kursk, the German command was accustomed to the fact that Soviet aviation usually did not inflict heavy losses on medium and heavy tanks, and air strikes mainly affected transport units involved in the transport of fuel and ammunition.

IL-2 could carry up to 192 cumulative bombs in 4 cassettes, and up to 220 PTAB-2,5-1,5 bombs could be placed in the internal bomb bays. When dropped in horizontal flight from a height of 75–100 m, one attack aircraft was able to cover a 20x80 m strip, destroying all enemy equipment in it.

As a result, the sudden use of new anti-tank bombs not only led to heavy losses, but also had a strong psychological impact on the enemy.

However, the destruction of a tank or self-propelled guns when hit by a cumulative bomb did not always happen. Penetration of the upper armor in the habitable compartment, in the area of ​​​​the power plant, often led to minor damage, death or injury of 1-2 crew members. In this case, after repair and replenishment of the crew, the armored vehicle returned to service.

In addition, the reliability of the PTAB operation left much to be desired. In about 5% of cases, the fuse's actuating-safety mechanism failed, most often caused by jamming of the impellers in the cylindrical stabilizer, after which the fuse did not cock. On the other hand, even with a relatively high percentage of fuse failures, the massive use of cumulative bombs provided acceptable efficiency. PTAB-2,5-1,5 had a low cost, which made it possible to use them in large quantities, which, as you know, sometimes turns into quality. As of May 1945, more than 13 million HEAT bombs were sent to the active army.

During the war, the irretrievable losses of German armored vehicles from aviation operations, as a rule, were no more than 5%, after the use of PTAB in certain sectors of the front, this figure exceeded 20%. To reduce losses, the Germans switched to dispersed marching and pre-battle formations, which in turn made it very difficult to control tank units, increased the time for their deployment, concentration and redeployment, and complicated the interaction between them.

During stops, German tankers began to place their vehicles under various sheds, trees and install light metal nets over the roof of the turret and hull. The dispersal of combat and marching formations of enemy armored vehicles in the final period of the war, of course, reduced the effectiveness of the PTAB, but cumulative bombs still remained an effective anti-tank weapon, in many respects surpassing 25-100-kg bombs.


IL-2 was not the only type of combat aircraft of the Red Army Air Force, from which the PTAB was used.

This aviation ammunition, due to its ease and versatility of use, was part of the bomb armament of the Pe-2, Tu-2, Il-4 bombers. In cassettes of small KBM bombs, up to 132 PTAB-2,5-1,5 were hung on Po-2 night bombers. The Yak-9B fighter-bombers could carry four cassettes of 32 bombs each. At the final stage of the war, they were also armed with new Il-10 attack aircraft.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

69 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. KCA
    -1
    24 October 2022 05: 57
    It seems like the PTABs were the most productive anti-tank ones, hundreds of them were poured out with IL-2, one out of a hundred exactly extinguished the tank on the wilderness, the RS had to be able to hit, and the PTAB began to pour in and pour everything that is, but there were a lot of them, more than 200
    1. AUL
      +5
      24 October 2022 09: 25
      Pilots called PTABs "cabbage" for the shape of the explosion on the ground.
  2. +4
    24 October 2022 06: 29
    It was Emelianenko who described how at the very beginning of the war, almost before takeoff, the first flight for use, the factory gunsmith, standing on the wing of the plane, explained to Kholobaev how to shoot RSs. Good day, Sergey! did you go fishing? Yesterday I was from Uktura-Gura, there is still a lot of water, but it took my soul a little.
    1. +5
      24 October 2022 10: 40
      Quote: Fitter65
      Good day, Sergey! did you go fishing? Yesterday I was from Uktura-Gura, there is still a lot of water, but it took my soul a little.

      Hello, hello
      Last Saturday we went to Boktorka, caught a few medium-sized grubs. The water in the river is large, it was badly caught. But the weather was good and the soul rested. In the week I plan to get out to the Shargoli area or to Poplars. The iconic ones say that the pike on the gum takes well.
      1. +4
        24 October 2022 12: 00
        Quote: Bongo
        But the weather was good and the soul rested. In the week I plan to get out to the Shargoli area or to Poplars.

        That's what people are breaking into Europe. When the house is so beautiful. We probably won’t go this weekend, but on November we’ll go back to the taiga for fresh air good good drinks
      2. +4
        24 October 2022 20: 40
        No tail, no scales!
        Thanks Sergey for the article, I didn’t miss it. Honestly liked it. It seems you know everything, but the puzzle has developed only after reading your work. Thanks again!
  3. -3
    24 October 2022 06: 31
    At firing ranges organized in September 1941 to assess the real combat effectiveness of the RS-82 and RS-132, it turned out that the percentage of hits in a single stationary tank was 1,1%, and in a dense tank column - 3,7%. Shooting was carried out with single shells and a volley of 2, 4 and 8 shells. The greatest performance was obtained with volley fire. Shooting was carried out from a height of 100–400 m, with descent angles of 10–30°. Aiming began from 800 m, and the fire opened from 300–500 m.

    This was true for the IL-2, but for the I-153, completely different parameters. With the IL-2, it was impossible to accurately launch RSs, unlike the "Seagull". The future twice Hero of the Soviet Union Rechkalov on the "Seagull" in July of the 41st had already shot down the "Messerschmit" and destroyed the tank with rockets. the destruction of armored vehicles was very relevant and did not need the cover of fighters, the fighter itself, thanks to its high maneuverability, resisted the attacks of the Messerschmites well in a defensive battle. clumsy IL-153.
    1. +7
      24 October 2022 10: 27
      Quote: Konnick
      This was true for the IL-2, but for the I-153, completely different parameters. With the IL-2, it was impossible to accurately launch RSs, unlike the "Seagull".

      The accuracy of the RS is not determined by the type of carrier. The dispersion will be the same as with the I-153, with the Il-2, or with a fixed machine.
      Quote: Konnick
      The future twice Hero of the Soviet Union Rechkalov on the "Seagull" in July of the 41st already shot down the "Messerschmit" and destroyed the tank with rockets.

      Indeed, the RS-82 was actively used in air combat in the initial period of the Second World War. Yes But, the RS-82 with a remote fuse that was used to fire at enemy aircraft against ground targets was usually not used, and against the RS-82 tanks with a percussion fuse they were ineffective even with a direct hit.
      Quote: Konnick
      The I-153 attack fighter was better adapted for the accurate launch of the RS-82, had the possibility of a vertical dive, which was very important for the destruction of armored vehicles and did not need fighter cover, the fighter itself, due to its high maneuverability, in a defensive battle well withstood the attacks of the Messerschmites. Statistical data spoke of a better survival rate during assault sorties by almost 2-3 times compared to the armored clumsy Il-2.

      As the saying goes, practice is the criterion of truth. With proper use of the I-153 against ground targets, they were not bad, and with a highly qualified pilot they could fend for themselves in aerial combat. But at the same time, due to a very insignificant combat load and weak built-in weapons, they were several times inferior to the Il-2 in terms of strike capabilities. In addition, the "Seagulls" used the tactic of one-time sudden attacks, "iron" the targets as the IL-2 did, due to the high vulnerability even to small arms, the biplanes could not.
      1. -4
        24 October 2022 11: 07
        The accuracy of the RS is not determined by the type of carrier. The dispersion will be the same as with the I-153, with the IL-2, or with a fixed machine


        Controversial statement
        This is from Rechkalov's memoirs -

        It didn't take long to get ready. The target was a lone tree on the edge of a ravine. I took to the air and smoothly brought the plane into a gentle dive. Below, spectators loomed like little insects. I aimed diligently. And when the goal hung on a cross hair thread, I started and at the same moment a characteristic whistle was heard [126] through the noise of the motor. The "thread" is broken. The tree, cut down by the ruptures, fell to the ground.

        Kuzma Bessekirny was in seventh heaven. Still would! To dig up such a strong weapon in the warehouse, which immediately proved itself in the eyes of the pilots!


        Here is the goal! Just for the "eres"! I caught the most open object in the crosshairs - a tank. The bombs just dropped by Dubinin and Zibin came into view. They separated smoothly, reluctantly, as if they did not want to part with their planes.


        And again look at the ground. The black cross on the enemy tank grew rapidly. The vague outlines of the white border became clearer. It's time! Two tailed comets burst from under the wings and immediately exploded in the steel hull. Following Dubinin, I got out of the dive and could not resist - I looked down. Explosions of bombs rumbled throughout the forest, and above all this gigantic whirlwind, a huge black column of smoke stretched upward - a direct hit from my shells.

        “One attack - one tank is on fire. And I have six more pieces under my wings,” I happily counted, “that’s three more attacks. Do not visit him, the bastard, in my city ... "



        Valentin Grigoryevich Averyanov (pilot, Hero of the Soviet Union):

        The aircraft for this war was good and necessary. Yes, he did not save the crews very much, but as a weapon it was an excellent car ... Yes, he could not dive, but due to work at low altitude he was very effective. We took 400 kg of bombs, rarely 600 - did not take off. True, the attack aircraft did not have a real bomber sight, but it seems to me that they did not need it. What is it for? There's no time to aim! The same applies to the RS - they flew, they scared. The most accurate weapon of an attack aircraft is cannons. Very good 23 mm VYa guns. I had to fly with 37 mm NS-37 guns. When you shoot from them, the plane stops - a very strong return. No pleasure, but a powerful weapon, of course.


        For RSs, there were no sights on the IL-2 at all, a long hood interfered.
        1. +7
          24 October 2022 13: 21
          Quote: Konnick
          This is from Rechkalov's memoirs -

          Rechkalov was an ace, did we have many of them?
          Concerning
          Quote: Konnick
          Controversial statement
          then the ballistics is the same for everyone.
          Quote: Konnick
          For RSs, there were no sights on the IL-2 at all, a long hood interfered.
          And what sights for the RS were available on our other aircraft, acres used for small arms and cannon weapons?
          Quote: Konnick
          And again look at the ground. The black cross on the enemy tank grew rapidly. The vague outlines of the white border became clearer. It's time! Two tailed comets burst from under the wings and immediately exploded in a steel case ...

          I don’t want to underestimate the merits of our pilots, but what you are quoting is for the most part “hunting stories” of literary workers who prepared memoirs.
          It must be understood that even getting into a tank from a cannon was not easy, what to say about RS that had much greater dispersion. This is confirmed by numerous tests at the range and statistics of combat use.
          Quote: Konnick
          And this was a vicious tactic of using the IL-2, because of which we suffered heavy losses of aircraft. The saturation of the front line of the Germans with small-caliber anti-aircraft guns doomed the IL-2 to death.

          Due to objective reasons, the main means of air defense of the front line were ZPU rifle caliber, and iron Front edge IL-2, in the absence of enemy IL-2 fighters in the air, could be practically punished without punishment.
          The Germans had the best anti-aircraft artillery, but it did not cover the front line, but the near and far rear and important objects. ZSU and ZPU on various chassis were used to accompany the columns.


          Quote: Konnick
          The bridges destroyed the I-16 from a vertical dive with two FAB-250 bombs.

          Come on, cut the sturgeon. Such a bomb load for the "donkey" is completely unbearable. No.
          1. -3
            24 October 2022 13: 47
            Come on, cut the sturgeon. Such a bomb load for the "donkey" is completely unbearable.

            Why such jargon "writer"?

            Vakhmistrov Vladimir Sergeevich worked on the project of aircraft carriers, therefore there was another term "Vakhmistrov's circus". The meaning of this project was as follows: under the wings of the TB-3 aircraft, two I-16s were attached, which in turn carried two FAB-250 bombs.


            Search on the Internet. Chernavodsky bridge. The I-16 itself could not take off with such a load, but dived perfectly.
            1. +5
              24 October 2022 13: 58
              Quote: Konnick
              Why such jargon "writer"?

              What do you not like about the word "donkey"? In the memoirs of Soviet pilots, this name I-16 is often found.
              Quote: Konnick
              Search on the Internet. Chernavodsky bridge. The I-16 itself could not take off with such a load, but dived perfectly.

              Lord, where do you come from? wassat And why are you trying to confirm your theories with isolated cases of the combat use of the "aircraft" TB-3 and I-16?
              1. -4
                24 October 2022 14: 18
                What do you not like about the word "donkey"?

                I'm talking about your sturgeon
          2. -1
            24 October 2022 14: 26
            Rechkalov was an ace, did we have many of them?

            Rechkalov became an ace later. And when he flew the I-153, he was almost decommissioned from service as a pilot due to color blindness.
      2. -5
        24 October 2022 11: 15
        Biplanes could not "iron" targets as the IL-2 did due to their high vulnerability even to small arms.

        And this was a vicious tactic of using the IL-2, because of which we suffered heavy losses of aircraft. The saturation of the front line of the Germans with small-caliber anti-aircraft guns doomed the IL-2 to death. The armored cabin protected the maximum from rifle-caliber bullets. Only from the operation "Bagration" did they begin to use the Il-2 effectively against columns of troops on the march and supply columns on the roads, as well as against steam locomotives on the roads, and not at stations.
        The bridges destroyed the I-16 from a vertical dive with two FAB-250 bombs. None of our bombers could achieve such accuracy in bombing, and even the IL-2 did not even try.
  4. +6
    24 October 2022 06: 43
    Good morning everyone and have a nice day! smile

    Many thanks to Sergey for an interesting and complete article. I, a person who is very far from aviation, but as a tanker, albeit a former one, it was very interesting to learn about the capabilities of our aviation in combating German tanks. Well, both our designers and pilots did what they could, and in the end they did very well.

    I wonder what caressed this "four". laughing
    1. +6
      24 October 2022 10: 17
      Kostya, hello! Haven't talked to you in a while!
      Unfortunately, you and your nephew did not consider it possible to comment on my scribbling on Ukrainian air defense. But I knew that you would not pass by this topic ... wink
      Quote: Sea Cat
      I wonder what caressed this "four".

      Difficult question, obviously there was an internal explosion. But with it, it usually breaks the tower.
      1. +5
        24 October 2022 11: 20
        Good morning, Sergey! smile

        Unfortunately, you and your nephew did not consider it possible to comment on my writings dedicated to Ukrainian air defense

        So I was sure that you would not touch on the topic of this war, but how it turned out. In general, I try not to get into it, but occasionally I still break down, although I perfectly understand how useless it is to explain something to a deaf-blind-mute who does not know Morse code. request
        You should at least warn in advance in a personal that you are dealing with this topic. And here I have a complete failure of the schedule with traffic, day and night and breakfast and dinner. Today again a night without sleep, but so far invigorating. Yes
        So beacon about a new article, otherwise I will miss again.

        Big hello to Olga! smile love
        1. +5
          24 October 2022 13: 25
          Quote: Sea Cat
          So I was sure that you would not touch on the topic of this war

          Starting a review on the air defense of Ukraine, I tried to convey to readers that reality, to put it mildly, does not fit with what our propaganda is broadcasting.
          Quote: Sea Cat
          So beacon about a new article, otherwise I will miss again.

          As you say! Yes
          Quote: Sea Cat
          Big hello to Olga!

          Mutually!
      2. +2
        25 October 2022 17: 22
        Unfortunately, you and your nephew didn't feel like commenting.
        Here you are, damn it, ran over like Philip the Handsome on the Templars !!!
        1. +4
          29 October 2022 03: 30
          Quote: 3x3zsave
          Here you are, damn it, ran over like Philip the Handsome on the Templars !!!

          You again demonstrate examples from your favorite Middle Ages. Nevertheless, your opinion on the cycle on the current state of Ukrainian air defense would be interesting to me.
          Especially considering that this topic is very difficult, and I tried to be as restrained and correct in my assessments as possible.
  5. -1
    24 October 2022 06: 46
    The book on aviation rockets used in the USSR during the war gives somewhat different information about the effectiveness of the RS. When using ROFS-132, an experienced pilot, 1..2 shells were spent on the tank. There were not enough shells and there was competition among the pilots for these shells. ROFS-132 was guaranteed to disable any type of tank. After a direct hit, the tank turned into irretrievable losses. ROFS-132 is an aircraft version of the M-13 projectile from Katyusha.
    1. +6
      24 October 2022 10: 13
      Quote: 2112vda
      The book on aviation rockets used in the USSR during the war gives somewhat different information about the effectiveness of the RS.
      I would be very grateful if you could share authoritative source.

      Quote: 2112vda
      When using ROFS-132, an experienced pilot, 1..2 shells were spent on the tank.

      This cannot be true, since for this the rockets had to be comparable in accuracy to aircraft guns. And this, as you know, was not achieved. No.
      1. +1
        24 October 2022 11: 42
        S.N. Reznichenko "Reactive Armament of the Soviet Air Force 1930-1945." Moscow 2007.
        1. +4
          24 October 2022 13: 36
          I got acquainted, a lot of frankly unreliable information and common phrases. The author is trying to wishful thinking. Unfortunately, field tests and real combat statistics do not correspond to this:
          The use of Il-2 attack aircraft in the first days of the war showed that a trained pilot with a RS projectile from a distance of 300-400 meters on average hit two tanks, with good training - one or two, with mediocre - no more than one.

          It is reliably known that a flight of 4 Il-2s during a sortie against armored vehicles, with a standard load of 400 kg, using the entire available arsenal (bombs, missiles and guns), on average, destroyed or disabled 1-2 tanks.
          1. 0
            25 October 2022 10: 56
            Depending on personal preferences, everyone interprets information in a favorable light for themselves. So it has always been, so it is, and so it will be. Many factors influence the accuracy of firing ERs, for example:
            1. The method of storage of the RS at the airport.
            2. Qualification of the pilot.
            3. Qualification of the technical staff, namely the armed forces.
            Alexander Ivanovich Pokryshkin describes how he screwed up those. composition for a careless attitude with the RS-82 due to deformations of the stabilizers, the shells flew anywhere. When it is said that a gun has a higher accuracy when firing, one should not forget about the caliber of the gun and the weight of the aircraft itself as a gun platform. In some aviation units, gunsmiths regularly checked the installation of launch beams and reconciled them, in others they did not pay attention to this, as a result, feedback on the effectiveness of the RS was opposite. And then, the landfill reports are adjusted to the prevailing opinion of the management. At the beginning of the war, there was a skeptical attitude towards MS among a number of leaders. During the war, our fighter aviation abandoned the RS, and the aviation of the allies and Germany, on the contrary, only strengthened the equipment of their air forces with missiles. So objective information can only be obtained by comparing information from many different sources, but this just isn’t there.
            1. 0
              4 November 2022 09: 43
              Many factors influence the accuracy of firing ERs, for example:

              Well, yes, there are such fools sitting at the training ground who cannot meet these conditions.
              And then, the landfill reports are adjusted to the prevailing opinion of the management.

              Yeah, and in the leadership there are German reptilians, chopping effective weapons.
              During the war, our fighter aviation abandoned the RS, and the aviation of the allies and Germany, on the contrary, only strengthened the equipment of their air forces with missiles.

              The Germans used bunk blocks to fight bombers, they did not work on the ground with them. The British and Americans used missiles, but they used them in the same way as plus or minus silts (except that naval targets were also added) and also with dubious effectiveness against tanks.
  6. +1
    24 October 2022 06: 57
    "In the 45-mm aircraft gun NS-45, for the first time in the USSR, a muzzle brake was used on an aircraft, absorbing up to 85% of the recoil energy."

    Amazing. They suffered from recoil with 37-graph paper, but they never thought of putting on a muzzle brake known from the 19th century. And in the end they chose to suffer from insufficient power of 23mm.
    1. +4
      24 October 2022 10: 09
      The idea of ​​using large-caliber guns on aircraft to destroy armored vehicles was initially counterproductive for many reasons, not only due to excessive recoil.
      1. +1
        24 October 2022 16: 04
        The "unproductivity" of large calibers can be explained by the lack of a platform for this type of guns. Wing mount 37 mm guns is not the best solution. Based on the "afterknowledge", the most suitable aircraft for a 37 mm front sight could be the Yak-2, with the installation of a gun under the fuselage and the rejection of a mobile artillery mount. But this aircraft was abandoned in favor of the IL-2. There were other 2-engine aircraft on which powerful guns could be installed.
        In addition, it must be remembered that many of the data published as the ultimate truth reflected and reflects the opinion of only a certain, interested group of military experts. The struggle between KBs has always existed and will continue to exist. It is customary to spread rot on competitors everywhere, regardless of the political system in a particular country. Therefore, as Kozma Prutkov said: "Question everything." More or less objective information can only be obtained by comparing a sufficiently large number of sources of information, and not blindly trusting someone alone.
      2. -1
        24 October 2022 17: 39
        yes, of course. a rudel on the u-87 with 37mm knocked out several hundred tanks.
        in the absence of ATGMs and other guided weapons, a cannon on an airplane is generally the best means against tanks. just the plane and gun should be right.
        I would put 76mm on a twin-engine armored attack aircraft
        1. +4
          24 October 2022 19: 42
          According to Rudel's memoirs, he generally defeated the USSR alone.
          1. 0
            29 October 2022 15: 55
            Quote: 2112vda
            According to Rudel's memoirs, he generally defeated the USSR alone.

            He forgot about Wittmann and Gulerian ..
            Just then "... the Fuhrer began to fuss under his feet and the war had to be drained urgently so that he would not get busy ..."
  7. -6
    24 October 2022 07: 02
    Interestingly, is there something similar to the PTAB-2,5-1,5 in the range of ammunition of our MLRS? ok if there is smile
    1. KCA
      0
      24 October 2022 09: 49
      The RS 220 and 300mm have what the hell, just at least 5 different types, and cassette, not used, because prohibited, and incendiary magnesium, thermobaric and others
  8. -1
    24 October 2022 07: 23
    Can you clarify with the author what kind of machine gun of 14.5 mm caliber he means?
    According to the book by D.N. Bolotin, the only Soviet machine gun of this caliber was the KPV, invented in 1944 and adopted by the ground forces in 1949.
    1. +3
      24 October 2022 10: 07
      Quote: Amateur
      Can you clarify with the author what kind of machine gun of 14.5 mm caliber he means?

      Apparently you didn't read too carefully? Here's what the post says:
      aircraft designer S.V. Ilyushin proposed to equip the Il-2 attack aircraft with 14,5-mm machine guns created on the basis of the VYa cannon.

      Do you have reasonable doubts that VYa could be adapted for a 14,5 mm cartridge?
      1. -3
        24 October 2022 13: 28
        You there are reasonable doubts about the fact that VYa could be adapted for a 14,5 mm cartridge?

        I'm only interested in the source where you found this information.
        And I don’t know if it’s possible or not to remake the VYa cannon to a different caliber, because I am not a specialist in aviation small arms and cannon weapons.
        1. +3
          24 October 2022 13: 50
          Quote: Amateur
          I'm only interested in the source where you found this information.

          I usually try with people until they demonstrate inadequacy to communicate correctly. But when a person pretends that he is not able to use search engines, this does not cause understanding. Regarding attempts to create aviation 14,5-mm machine guns during the Second World War, there is enough information in various sources. I believe in you! Good luck!
  9. -9
    24 October 2022 08: 16
    If only now Il2 thousand two with PTABs, nurses and guns ..
  10. +8
    24 October 2022 08: 54
    Quote: Victor Sergeev
    If only now Il2 thousand two with PTABs, nurses and guns ..

    Yeah, and put a sofa division at the helm. Let them reduce the enemy's MANPADS population with their lives.
    1. -5
      24 October 2022 15: 56
      You're laughing in vain. As practice with geraniums has shown, for an internal combustion engine air defense system with a low thermal footprint, the target is practically invisible. By the time it got to the ukrov, they had ruined half of Kyiv with their S-300 missiles. So, an attack aircraft of such a plan would have its own niche of application, especially given its unpretentiousness at the base.
      By the way, the army had such a project, to create a light, piston attack aircraft, but like many incomprehensible things, our MO was fucked up.
      1. Alf
        +5
        24 October 2022 19: 46
        Quote: Realist58
        As practice with geraniums has shown, for an internal combustion engine air defense system with a low thermal footprint, the target is almost invisible.

        Especially if you remember that a rabid Persian moped has a dvigun of 50 mares, and an IL-2 has 1650 ... Well, who will have higher IR visibility?
        1. 0
          30 October 2022 14: 03
          The engine temperature and exhaust temperature of a piston internal combustion engine are much lower than the exhaust temperature of a turbojet. This means that the IR trap signal will be more contrasting for the missile. It is difficult to say about the capture of the GOS MANPADS. The information is contradictory.
          The essence of such an attack aircraft is in speed greater than that of a helicopter, and less than that of a su-25. This means that the accuracy of using nurses will be higher than that of the su-25, and the security will be greater than that of a helicopter. I'm not saying that you need to replace the entire fleet with piston ones, but potentially their presence can be useful.
          1. 0
            4 November 2022 09: 51
            The piston is an excellent target for modern weapons, a conditional IL-2 over the battlefield can be shot down not only by MANPADS, but also by ATGMs and some ZSU-23-2 with a modern computer. The Tukano-class lives only within the framework of a counter-guerrilla war and is still equipped with high-precision weapons, it’s just that it’s easier to learn a pilot for such an aircraft and it’s cheaper to operate.
      2. +1
        25 October 2022 01: 25
        for MANPADS internal combustion engines with a low thermal footprint, the target is almost invisible. Until the ukrov got it, they blew half of Kyiv with their S-300 missiles

        Do you think the S-300 is being guided into a "heat trail"?
        1. 0
          30 October 2022 14: 04
          The S-300 does not control the cutting edge. The chance of failure is too great.
  11. +2
    24 October 2022 10: 42
    Competent article. The numbers coincide with the previously read, the conclusions too. Thanks to the author for the work. By the way, the accuracy of cannon fire from fighters on B-17 bombers was also around 2% among the Germans. To destroy a bomber, an average of 2 20 mm shells was needed. That is, the entire ammunition load was enough for 1 bomber per flight.
    1. +6
      24 October 2022 10: 46
      Thanks for the kind words!
      But there seems to be a typo here:
      Quote: dauria
      To destroy a bomber, it was necessary on average 2 projectile 20 mm.
      what
      Hits two 20-mm shells, especially when firing from MG-FF, were not always enough even to shoot down a fighter.
  12. +2
    24 October 2022 11: 47
    When bombing from a dive, the Pe-2, which had a normal bomb load of 600 kg, bombed more accurately.
    That's just it was not often bombed from a dive.
  13. +3
    24 October 2022 11: 53
    Thank you for the article.
    There is an interesting lecture by G.P. on aircraft guns. Serov on the Tactics Media channel.
  14. +5
    24 October 2022 12: 37
    Credo of the author of the article: Conciseness and Thoroughness.
    Thank you, Sergey!

    Best regards, hi
  15. +7
    24 October 2022 12: 53
    Sergey, hi as always, thanks and respect, but let me get bored too:
    in each wing of which was placed one cannon

    in each plane of the wing, the IL-2 has one wing!
    1. +6
      24 October 2022 13: 39
      Hello Roman!
      Quote: novel xnumx
      in each plane of the wing, the IL-2 has one wing!

      Thanks, I'm aware. But sometimes your eyes are blurred, you think one thing, and you write another. However, this only indicates that the article is original, and not copied from other resources.
      1. +3
        24 October 2022 13: 47
        Good article. But, to be honest, the topic is hackneyed, and such topics are not at your level. Diffuse talent.
        1. +6
          24 October 2022 14: 02
          Quote from Nephilim
          Good article. But, to be honest, the topic is hackneyed, and such topics are not at your level. Diffuse talent.

          For a number of reasons, I cannot write objectively about what is really relevant now. I hope that this topic is still of interest to someone. Moreover, judging by a number of comments, some readers have a distorted idea of ​​the subject of conversation or simply a lack of knowledge. In any case, there is no harm from this article.
          1. +5
            24 October 2022 14: 19
            In any case, there is no harm from this article.

            This is beyond any doubt.
            judging by a number of comments, some readers have a distorted idea of ​​​​the subject of conversation or simply a lack of knowledge

            In relation to today's contingent of the site, the category "some" is an obvious oxymoron. Militant ignorance is the motto of the current site.
      2. +5
        24 October 2022 14: 01
        Well, I never doubted you! I repeat - it's time to think about the book (not one already!)
        1. +5
          24 October 2022 14: 09
          Roman, if you take on the publishing costs, then why not. wink
          Well, seriously, I make a living in a completely different way, and for me it's fun and exercise for the brain.
          1. +5
            24 October 2022 15: 42
            Not everything about yourself, you need to think about others!
  16. +3
    24 October 2022 14: 54
    hi
    As always, an interesting article, thanks to the author!
    good

    The winged version of the ShVAK weighed 40 kg and had a length of 1 mm. Rate of fire - 679-700 rds / min. An armor-piercing incendiary projectile weighing 800 g left the barrel at an initial speed of 96 m/s.

    He left something, but on 29.07.1936/XNUMX/XNUMX it was noted that "the tested ShVAK gun has a projectile with an unsatisfactory shape factor (about 2 times worse than usual), which affects the rapid loss of projectile speed in flight ... at a distance of 1000 m it decreases to 250 m / s. The unsatisfactory ballistics of the projectile was obtained because the gun was not designed for the projectile ... the dimensions of the projectile were adapted to the existing automation".
    Comrade Shpitalny also emphasized: "Especially many complaints are made about the ballistics of the 20mm ShVAK cannon projectile, but they are completely silent about the fact that the projectile size developed by me was changed without my consent, despite my strong protests ...".
    IMHO, comrade Shpitalny was still that comrade, so ....

    Fortunately, "intelligence reported accurately" on 20.04.1936/23/23 that Madsen was making a XNUMX mm cannon with good characteristics, and IMHO, from that moment the XNUMX mm caliber began to "loom" in the USSR.

    PS. If the "heavens of heaven" do not open up on the topic "IL2, how many bombs he carried in real life; what is the effectiveness of wing guns and anti-aircraft weapons of the Air Force KA" and so on, then I will personally "open" them! soldier
    1. +4
      24 October 2022 15: 44
      And open up! Fuck it!! The text of your comment is too short and, in the opinion of the site administration, does not carry useful information.
  17. The comment was deleted.
  18. +4
    24 October 2022 16: 08
    Konnick (Nikolai):
    For RSs, there were no sights on the IL-2 at all, a long hood interfered.

    Bongo (Sergey):
    And what sights for the RS were available on our other aircraft, acres used for small arms and cannon weapons?

    On the IL-2, the BB-1 (Vizir Vasilyeva-1) was mainly used, and so there the marks for firing the RS-82 were:
    1. -1
      25 October 2022 11: 50
      On the IL-2, the BB-1 (Vizir Vasilyeva-1) was mainly used, and so there the marks for firing the RS-82 were

      This sight-sight appeared only in the summer of 42, and from the very beginning the I-153 had a simple PAK-1, the aiming axis of which was the same for machine guns and RS.
  19. +3
    25 October 2022 18: 50
    hi
    During the war, the irretrievable losses of German armored vehicles from aviation operations, as a rule, were no more than 5%, after the use of PTAB in certain sectors of the front, this figure exceeded 20%.


    Reviews about PTAB were different:
    From the Air Force KA: "In the fight against German armored vehicles, the crews of the 291st division especially distinguished themselves, which for the first time and very successfully used PTAB-2,5-1,5 cumulative bombs.
    The initiative belonged to the eight of the 61st cap of senior lieutenant AA Dobkevich (Hero of the Soviet Union from 13.4.44), which attacked enemy tanks, vehicles, and artillery firing positions in the Butovo area. The division's documents testify that the first bombs were dropped from a height of 600-300 meters, which had an exceptional effect. After the attack, the crews observed numerous fires, as well as burning tanks and cars. Trying not to lose the initiative, the division commander, Colonel A.N. Vitruk, lifted into the air groups of attack aircraft of the neighboring 241st and 617th caps, which did not allow the enemy to turn into battle formations. It is interesting to note that for the crews of the 617th Cap, 8 sorties made on July 5 against German tanks were the only ones for the whole day. However, having spent 1103 PTABs and AO-25s, as well as 28 PCs, the pilots of the group announced the destruction of 15 tanks and 6 vehicles. In total, during 29 sorties, groups of the 61st and 617th caps managed to destroy 30 tanks and 18 vehicles. Describing the use of cumulative bombs, the headquarters of the 291st division noted: “The use of PTAB-1,5 on enemy tanks gave excellent results. The crews observed continuous fire in the area of ​​​​the explosion of bombs, against which 15 burning tanks stood out.

    Attack aircraft of the 1st Shak, operating mainly in front of the front of the 1st Tank Army, carried out 218 sorties, destroying, according to the crews, 60 tanks and 176 vehicles. To establish the real effectiveness of the PTAB in the fight against armored targets, the headquarters of the 2nd Air Army organized a demonstrative strike on the accumulation of enemy tanks. Six Il-2s of the 617th cap of the 291st battalion, led by the regiment commander Major Lomovtsev, took off into the air, which carried out two attacks in the Pokrovka, Yakovlevo, Kozmo-Demyanovka areas. As a result, 14 tanks were hit, and four large explosions were also caused. The strike was observed by army staff officers who personally testified to the effectiveness of the new anti-tank weapon.

    At the same time, the reports of the attack aircraft crews on the successes achieved continued to exceed all conceivable limits. According to the operational reports of the 2nd Air Army, 145 German tanks and almost 350 vehicles were destroyed during the day of fighting! In addition, 10 tank trucks were burned, 4 ammunition depots and 2 fuel depots were destroyed, fire was suppressed by 5 anti-aircraft batteries and 5 field artillery batteries. The main weapons of the Il-2 crews in the fight against armored vehicles were cumulative PTABs. So, for example, the aviators of the 266th and 292nd divisions of the 1st shak considered 9 and 41 tanks destroyed on July 47, having used up 2353 and 2568 bombs of this type[158].

    The forces of the 1st Shak and the 291st Shad by July 11 were severely undermined in previous battles. Of the 539 daytime sorties made by the pilots of the 2nd Air Army on that day, only 133 were attack aircraft. Attack aircraft were forced to fly out on combat missions in small groups - as part of fours and sixes. Due to the acute lack of materiel, the organization of massive strikes was out of the question. It should be noted that even the official numbers of destroyed enemy equipment have significantly decreased. So, for example, the headquarters of the 291st and 292nd shads, which operated in two regiments, reported "only" 18 and 22 destroyed tanks. Slightly higher performance in combat work was demonstrated by the crews of the 266th division, 17 Il-2 of which made 48 sorties per day. Having spent 1272 PATBs, the crews of the division reported 39 destroyed and wrecked enemy tanks.
    The appearance since July 15 of a relatively large number of German tanks added to the work of the attack aviation of the 15th Air Army, allowing the active use of stocks of cumulative PTABs. One of the first to most successfully use this new weapon was the crews of six "silts" of the 810th cap under the command of junior lieutenant Rogachev. In the Soymonovo area, they attacked about 50 tanks that were prepared before the attack. The interval between the armored vehicles was no more than 5-10 meters, while the pilots of the "silts" went on the attack along the line. This allowed them to set fire to 15 German tanks during four attacks[209]. Even more effective were the actions of attack aircraft on July 16, when 99 Il-2, assisting the troops of the 63rd Army, attacked a large concentration of enemy armored vehicles. As a result of a massive strike from the front line and the command post of the 63rd Army, it was clear that the Germans were forced to tow up to 28 destroyed tanks and self-propelled guns to the rear[210].
    According to the experience of using cumulative bombs by the crews of the 3rd shak, as well as the data of the ground units, it was possible to find out the following: “... with a direct hit on the tank, the PTAB-2,5–1,5 bomb disables it or completely destroys it, causing fire and explosions ammunition. The bomb load of one aircraft, with the tactically correct use of the PTAB, makes it possible to hit several tanks from one run, especially their accumulation at the places of refueling at the starting lines, etc. ”[211].
  20. +3
    25 October 2022 18: 50
    Review from a prisoner of war (the same source, but ...): testimony of a corporal of the 394th motorized regiment of the 3rd tank division, who during interrogation showed the following: “For the first time, Russian attack aircraft attacked our group of 100 tanks in the area north of Belgorod at 5 o’clock on the morning of July 6, 1943. In my opinion, when attacking our tanks, the Russians began to use some new type of bombs with great efficiency, since during this raid 15-20 Russian attack aircraft dropped small-caliber bombs from a low altitude, up to about 3 kilograms, but, despite the small caliber, the effect was exceptional, namely, as a result of the attack, 18 tanks were burned and 2 were knocked out. Tanks caught fire not only from a direct hit by bombs, but also from bombs that fell from 2 to 5 meters from the tank. I myself observed a lot when several bombs fell no further than 4 meters from the tank and as a result the caterpillar flew off and the motor part of the tank ignited. After the stormtrooper raid, I observed downed turrets on tanks, bent gun barrels, and mostly bent tracks. Upon contact with the ground, this bomb breaks into the ground to a shallow depth, approximately 20-30 centimeters, after which it explodes and produces an explosion of great force in relation to its caliber. In this case, the bomb creates a high temperature. At the same time, I can’t say for sure whether this group of attack aircraft or another attacked our motorized rifle battalion resting in cars. Small caliber bombs rained down on our heads. As a result of this assault, the battalion lost up to 50% of its material and personnel, namely, 90 vehicles were burned and 120 people were killed. In conclusion, I can say that during my entire stay on the Eastern Front, I have never seen such effective actions by Russian aviation and effective small-caliber bombs. I don’t have enough words to express the full force of the effectiveness of the latest Russian air raids”[144].
    The crews of the attack aircraft, in turn, emphasized that it was often difficult to monitor the results of the use of PTAB on enemy equipment. For example, we give the lines of the report of the 5th Guards. shad of the 17th air army, whose flight crew noted: “Observing the results of the use of these bombs is difficult, it creates a visual impression that the entire area where the bombs fell, regardless of the presence of objects, is on fire, everything was on fire: vegetation, tanks, vehicles” [145].

    Well, the opinion of a modern researcher: Valery Zamulin in the book "The Forgotten Battle of the Kursk Bulge" mentions - "the effectiveness of the PTAB was doubtful - there is no data on the losses of German tanks from them. The only recollections relate to the fact that the PTAB easily set fire to the tanks even when they fell nearby, but the fire was quickly extinguished and the tank did not fail.
  21. 0
    26 October 2022 14: 43
    1. Aviation was ineffective against tanks in World War II. This applies to both German and Soviet and American and British aviation. IL-2s effectively attacked other targets - trucks and carts, railway transport, suppressed artillery, sank boats and small ships.
    2. The IL-2 can be used with great success even today, as the Su-25 is now used as a flying MLRS. How much will the cost of a modern version of the IL-2 with a turboprop engine, modern equipment, and so on.
  22. 0
    15 December 2022 14: 39
    PTABs are certainly good, but in fact our aviation did not have the same effective means for fighting tanks as the Germans had the Yu-87 "thing" dive bomber with its anti-tank guns and armor-piercing shells for them. They destroyed a lot of our tanks. Yes, and he dropped bombs more accurately.
  23. 0
    15 December 2022 20: 47
    And why didn’t they put a cumulative warhead on the RS?

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"