"Emmanuel Gustin" wrote in message ...
wrote in message
om...


The gist is that WWII fighter-bombers were very poor tank
destroyers. They stopped the tank divisions by wreaking havoc
among soft-skinned supply vehicles and the supporting infantry
and artillery units -- a German WWII panzer division was really
a mixed mobile unit, not a unit purely equipped with tanks.
(Incidentally, the same was true of the Stuka's; de Gaulle reported
in 1940 that they did his tanks little harm but destroyed his
fuel trucks, which could not seek cover by leaving the road.)

These aircraft did not have a weapon that was both sufficiently
powerful and sufficiently accurate against tanks. (Rockets were
devastating, but the hit probability was only 0.5%.) On some
occasions when the Allies were left in possesion of the battlefield,
investigation teams were able to compare the claims for destroyed
armoured vehicles of the fighter-bombers with the wrecks left
behind. Very few were disabled by aircraft, less than a tenth of
what the air forces claimed.



A number of aircaft field heavey cannon, up to 75mm especialy for
German aircraft. (Henschel Hs 293, some Ju88s, )

30mm cannon (Mk103 ? ) firing tungsten cored amunition mounted on a
FW190 could penetrate 140mm I believe and the 37mm cannon on some
Stukas had similar penetraion. This is enough for anything but the
front of a WW2 tank.

While the British tried 40mm cannon on their Hurricane I find it odd
that the P47 wasn't fitted with twin 30mm-40mm cannon. By sacrificing
6 of the 8 0.5" MG the massive P47 would have sufferd less performace
drop than smaller aircraft.

At least his way there would be a powerfull AND accurate weapon.