Military Review

Kaiser Flying Tanks

17



As you know, the first Tankswho entered the battle exactly 100 years ago were English, and after the British they began to build and use the French. The Germans, in the matter of creating ground-based armored combat vehicles, were far behind their opponents. However, they have an unconditional priority in the development and use of "flying tanks", that is, armored combat aircraft designed to attack ground targets, which will later be called militants in Russia, and even later - attack aircraft.

The first such aircraft was built in 1917 year by the company "Albatross Flugtsoygverk" designed by engineers Schubert and Telen. His photo is placed on the screen saver. The aircraft, which received the Albatros JI index, was a biplane of mixed construction with wooden wings and a tail part of the fuselage, taken unchanged from the scout Albatros C.XII. The central part of the fuselage was an armored box riveted from steel sheets 5 mm thick, which housed a double cabin and a gas tank.

The armament consisted of one Parabellum machine gun and two Spandau machine guns with 1000 rounds of ammunition, fortified in front of the cab at an angle of 45 down and firing through holes in the bottom of the fuselage. In addition, 30-50 kg of small bombs could be placed in the rear cockpit, which the shooter threw by hand, aiming "at the eye." Some cars were additionally equipped with the latest weapons - Becker automatic cannon caliber 20 mm, mounted on the left side and was used to fire ground objects.



The aircraft was highly appreciated by the German command, who ordered 50 copies first, and then increased the order to 240. However, their combat use showed that booking JI is not enough. Outside the armored hull there was a very vulnerable water cooling engine that could be “turned off” with a single bullet. In addition, downward machine guns turned out to be ineffective, as they were fired blindly.

Given these comments at the beginning of 1918, the aircraft was fundamentally refined. The new modification, named J.II, has armor covering the entire front of the vehicle, including the engine. There was also armored bottom and side radiator, mounted on racks in front of the upper wing. It can be said that the booking of J.II was in part even better than that of the twin variants of the Il-2 attack aircraft, in which the arrows sat behind the armored corps and died more often than the pilots.

The increase in the number of armor led to a significant weighting machine. He tried to compensate for the installation of a more powerful engine, however, the flight characteristics of the J.II significantly decreased compared to JI. In particular, the maximum speed dropped from 160 to 140 km / h, maneuverability and rate of climb also deteriorated. However, for the attack aircraft, the degree of protection was considered a more important indicator, and J.II launched into serial production instead of its predecessor. On the prototype and the first serial copies there were still inclined machine guns, but then they were replaced by synchronous ones, shooting in the direction of flight, so that the pilot could see where he was firing.
Until the end of the war, according to various sources, they built from 90 to 120 copies of J.II who took part in the final battles on the Western Front.



Albatros J.II on trial. The armored body is painted gray, the turret machine gun is not installed.



Another type of armored attack aircraft, adopted by the German Air Force in 1917, was an aircraft developed aviation A branch of the Algemeine Electrics Gesellschaft concern (abbreviated AEG) under the designation AEG JI In terms of layout, size and armament, it corresponded to Albatross JI, but in design it was a more advanced machine with an all-metal frame welded from thin-walled steel pipes.

Sheets of armored hulls 5,1 mm thick were fastened to the frame with bolts screwed into threaded bushings. Armor weight was 380 kg - more than a quarter of the total mass of the machine. The armor held the usual bullets of rifle caliber at distances 100-200 meters (depending on the angle of contact), and armor-piercing - at distances from 500 meters.

In 1918, the second modification appeared - AEG J.II with a slightly elongated fuselage and an increased steering wheel to improve stability and controllability. This modification is shown in the splash screen. The armor case is painted with brown red lead, the other surfaces are covered with camouflage “lozeng” fabric. By the end of the war, AEG airplanes became the most widespread type of armored attack aircraft in German aviation, all in all, 607 units were built - almost twice as many as the Albatross. Below - pictures of AEG JI

Kaiser Flying Tanks


Author:
Originator:
http://vikond65.livejournal.com/508456.html
17 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 24 July 2016 05: 53
    +5
    Very informative. Thanks to the author.
    1. mirag2
      mirag2 24 July 2016 08: 07
      +2
      Вfrom then video on the topic: "The Red Baron Richthofen and Fokker"
      1. alpamys
        alpamys 24 July 2016 11: 24
        0
        Quote: mirag2
        Then a video on the topic: "The Red Baron Richtofen and Fokker"

        thank you .. at the end see the captured pilot was
    2. The comment was deleted.
  2. svp67
    svp67 24 July 2016 06: 47
    +4
    It would be interesting to know how effective were these "Kaiser's flying tanks"? Why did the Germans not create something like that before World War II, but began to pay more attention to dive bombers?
  3. Fei_Wong
    Fei_Wong 24 July 2016 06: 52
    +1
    Not a candle to God, not a damn poker. A sort of intercourse between the IL-2 and the AC-130 "Hercules". But well done, cho. At least, both branches of the further development of assault aircraft have guessed (although "Hercules" is at most suitable to act against the Papuans without a normal air defense, and then, the Papuans are more than capable of snapping back in response, Vietnam has clearly proved this).
    By the way, on the Tu-2 "Fiery Hedgehog" they tried at one time to return to this dead-end solution - to stick many, many air-to-ground machine guns (I would even say, submachine guns, hih):
    1. avt
      avt 24 July 2016 08: 47
      +1
      Quote: Fei_Wong
      - stick in many, many air-to-ground machine guns (I would even say, machine pistols, hih):

      They would have searched without hurrying to comment, would have known that it’s generally the PCA installed. And according to the article, of course J-1 from Junkers is beyond competition.
    2. NIKNN
      NIKNN 24 July 2016 15: 10
      +2
      The concept of booking an airplane was always with everyone, which always led to a disproportionate increase in weight, and consequently a decrease in combat load and a deterioration in performance. The first Ilyushin succeeded in collecting all the desires and realizing in a particular aircraft, thanks to the use of the armored capsule used as a power element of the structure, in contrast to the hinge of armor on the finished aircraft. The same principle was applied to the Su25.
      As for shooting at an angle from the bottom, this principle applies now, laid in hanging cannon containers, but with the use of modern PRNK.
  4. Bormanxnumx
    Bormanxnumx 24 July 2016 09: 27
    +4
    Quote: Fei_Wong
    Not a candle to God, not a damn poker. A sort of intercourse between the IL-2 and the AC-130 "Hercules". But well done, cho. At least, both branches of the further development of assault aircraft have guessed (although "Hercules" is at most suitable to act against the Papuans without a normal air defense, and then, the Papuans are more than capable of snapping back in response, Vietnam has clearly proved this).
    By the way, on the Tu-2 "Fiery Hedgehog" they tried at one time to return to this dead-end solution - to stick many, many air-to-ground machine guns (I would even say, submachine guns, hih):

    Tell us what is the "dead end" of this J.1 Regarding the AC-130, the Americans are stunned and can afford to make and maintain such a "dead end" apparatus for the pleasure of driving the Papuans. They even slowly modernize it - the composition of the weapons is changing.
  5. Fei_Wong
    Fei_Wong 24 July 2016 09: 53
    +2
    Quote: avt
    Quote: Fei_Wong
    - stick in many, many air-to-ground machine guns (I would even say, machine pistols, hih):

    They would have searched without hurrying to comment, would have known that it’s generally the PCA installed. And according to the article, of course J-1 from Junkers is beyond competition.

    Do you STRONGLY believe that I did not know that there was a PPSh battery (especially attributing about "submachine guns")?
    One of the two of us is clearly cheating on us. And I'm sure - definitely not for me.
    1. avt
      avt 24 July 2016 10: 15
      +2
      Quote: Fei_Wong
      Do you seriously believe

      And while reading comments I don’t guess at the daisy you believe.
      Quote: Fei_Wong
      One of the two of us is clearly cheating on us.
      To one of the two of us, at least use appropriate emoticons to complete the thought or something.
      Quote: Fei_Wong
      And I'm sure - definitely not for me.

      Here's how to spend time solving the flight of your secret thought, well, there is no desire at all, and even on such a small information subject. Well this is for the future.
  6. Fei_Wong
    Fei_Wong 24 July 2016 10: 14
    +1
    Quote: BORMAN82
    Tell us what is the "dead end" of this J.1 Regarding the AC-130, the Americans are stunned and can afford to make and maintain such a "dead end" apparatus for the pleasure of driving the Papuans. They even slowly modernize it - the composition of the weapons is changing.

    Excuse me
    J.1 does not have a specific role - willy-nilly we use both airborne weapons and the fuselage. And these are two completely different tactics of warfare, and effective protection of the aircraft at the very least is possible only with a clear specialization. Fly over over the goal is one. Cut the same circles around - completely different. This is an attempt to sit on two chairs. And the fuselage machine guns are generally ridiculous: flash sticks in the realities of WWI would give (and would give) a much greater effect, especially if at the site of the machine guns they would have guessed to place flashtone boxes with the possibility of auto-reset by the pilot. Neither fish nor meat in one word. But pioneers are always hard.

    As for the AC-130 - so why be surprised? The US policy is to fight only with the Papuans (preferably for democracy und oil), and over the past 70 years it has not changed one iota. So yeah, these "Puffa magic dragons" are still quite useful to them.
    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpP6b8s03uG89J_dQSjTLkUum9XqAfT_c
    1. Bormanxnumx
      Bormanxnumx 24 July 2016 11: 52
      +5
      The composition and arrangement of machine guns corresponds to the realities of that time, and you are trying to deal with afterglow with a lead of 25-30 years.
      Regarding the AS-130, there is no need to be surprised, it suits them when used in specific situations - they did not create it to break through the air defense. For example, I have a question about the use of "Orthodox"
      MLRS "Buratino" - with a maximum missile range of 4500m. it, too, can only be used against popuas with RPGs, a more serious enemy will not let it come close to the range of using weapons - is Russia also preparing to fight with popuas?
  7. Fei_Wong
    Fei_Wong 24 July 2016 12: 26
    +1
    Quote: BORMAN82
    The composition and arrangement of machine guns corresponds to the realities of that time, and you are trying to deal with afterglow with a lead of 25-30 years.
    Regarding the AS-130, there is no need to be surprised, it suits them when used in specific situations - they did not create it to break through the air defense. For example, I have a question about the use of "Orthodox"
    MLRS "Buratino" - with a maximum missile range of 4500m. it, too, can only be used against popuas with RPGs, a more serious enemy will not let it come close to the range of using weapons - is Russia also preparing to fight with popuas?

    I didn’t try to do afterbirth. On the contrary, he noted that in this machine the Germans managed to combine both approaches of attack aircraft, moreover, at the dawn of aviation development. But this does not make this hybrid any better. And what about the flchett - the honest truth. Here and a contemporary would have seen a huge advantage of these over the ventral machine guns (by the way, I think that the "Fiery Hedgehog" from the Second World War would be similarly much more effective with flashhets than with a PPSh battery).

    And about Pinocchio ... In general, this weapon is very specific, of course. But invaluable in rough terrain or in a city. And to defend even against NATO forces such machines will be serious. Our army is traditionally strong in front-line aviation and the protection of columns. Kakbe and AS-130, one can argue, will hide behind no worse ... In theory. But only on it. Aircraft of direct fire support ALWAYS remains vulnerable to small-caliber anti-aircraft artillery and MANPADS. Those. - even to the air defense of the Papuans. He sees the goal - that means the goal sees it. With Pinocchio is not so simple. He does not need direct visibility. Protecting it is many times easier. Although I agree, Grads and Tornadoes give a much greater destructive effect, but they are very uneconomical and precisely that the gun on sparrows in many cases.
  8. Verdun
    Verdun 24 July 2016 14: 07
    +1
    It is rather strange that it was the Germans who took up the creation of such aircraft. After all, their industry, having become adept at creating higher-altitude and heavier engines of the so-called "airship type", only by the end of the war established the production of lighter "aviation" -type engines, providing high flight characteristics at low altitudes.
    But only on it. Aircraft of direct fire support ALWAYS remains vulnerable to small-caliber anti-aircraft artillery and MANPADS. Those. - even to the air defense of the Papuans. He sees the goal - that means the goal sees it.
    This is true, but only such an attack will surely destroy the target. If the enemy forces and the allied forces are in combat contact, it is very difficult even for clever ammunition to distinguish their own from strangers. About MLRS even say nothing. And it is in this situation that a well-armored attack aircraft can provide effective fire support.
  9. Fei_Wong
    Fei_Wong 24 July 2016 15: 44
    0
    Quote: Verdun
    And it is in this situation that a well-armored attack aircraft can provide effective fire support.

    Are you talking about the AC-130?
    1. Verdun
      Verdun 24 July 2016 17: 05
      0
      Quote: Fei_Wong
      Are you talking about the AC-130?

      Of course no. The Americans always had their own view on the development of attack aircraft. For example, even during the Vietnam War, they liked to use Chinook, shrimped with multi-barrel automatic guns and stuffed with ammunition, like shrimp and caviar. He shot at everything that moves, indiscriminately. Meanwhile, the Invader was of real combat value.
  10. moskowit
    moskowit 26 July 2016 19: 32
    0
    Interesting ...
    But one phrase confused me ...

    "... The armor held ordinary rifle-caliber bullets at distances of 100-200 meters (depending on the angle of impact), and armor-piercing bullets - at distances from 500 meters ..."

    Something is wrong ... Or is the heat acting on me?