If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
P-47/51 deflection shots into the belly of the German tanks, reality or fiction?
Saw this mentioned several times. Sounds somewhat implausible. A whole
lot implausible actually. Was this a common practice, an isolated incident blown out of proportions or a myth? Is there an approximate tally of German heavy armor (Pz IV and up) destroyed by the western allies attack planes? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: P-47/51 deflection shots into the belly of the German tanks,
reality or fiction? From: Ed Rasimus Date: 8/5/03 8:33 AM Pacific Daylight Time Message-id: What's really at play here is the fact that even today, tanks and armored vehicles are hard on the sides and soft on the top/bottom. Their most likely threat is from other armor or anti-armor ground forces. When a compromise needs to be made for overall gross weight reduction it takes place on the top and underside. For this reason, strafing armor at high angles (dive angles, not lead angles) the aircraft can be effective against tanks even though the armor of a tank is usually characterized as being capable of resisting that caliber of weapon. Since I never attacked a tank in a fighter I am giving you hearsay from fighter pilots who did. They described the attack this way. They would appproach the tank and their first aim point is behind the tank. They then walk their fire to the main body of the tank. The assumption is that the fire that they lay in behind the tank will ricochet up into the soft underbelly where armor is very thin. It worked better if the tank was on a hard surface rather than earth At least that is the way the story was told back then. But as I say, I have never attacked a tank in a fighter. I am just giving what pilots who did had to say at the time. Arthur Kramer Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
ArtKramr wrote: The assumption is that the fire that they lay in behind the tank will ricochet up into the soft underbelly where armor is very thin. Seems kind of stupid to have a soft underbelly in a vehicle which is the target for anti-tank mines? Is this really true? Dave |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I was taught by WW2/Korean War fighter pilots to attack a tank in two
ways - one was to strafe the side and try to knock a track pin loose, disconnecting the track and disabling the tank. A P80 pilot told me it worked. The second method was to aim at the rear deck of the tank in about a 30 degree dive and try to shoot through the cooling air grilles. They warned me that some tanks would turn the turret 180 degrees so the planes would waste ammo shooting at the thick armor glacis on the front of the tank. But if you get low enough you can tell front from rear. I did just this in an F4E and blew up a T54 tank south of the DMZ in 1972. Didn't have a gun camera but it looked just like the films from WW2, except in color. A hard yank got us over the fireball and debris. Apparently the bulkhead between the engine compartment and the crew compartment is only structural, not armored at all. A lot of tanks store their ammo on the front side of that bulkhead, too. Too bad for them. (G) Walt BJ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: P-47/51 deflection shots into the belly of the German tanks,
reality From: Dave Holford Date: 8/5/03 1:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time Message-id: ArtKramr wrote: The assumption is that the fire that they lay in behind the tank will ricochet up into the soft underbelly where armor is very thin. Seems kind of stupid to have a soft underbelly in a vehicle which is the target for anti-tank mines? Is this really true? Dave .. As I said I never flew those missions. I am just quoting P-47 pilots who did, as they told their stories to me. .. Arthur Kramer Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Apparently the bulkhead between the engine
compartment and the crew compartment is only structural, not armored at all. A lot of tanks store their ammo on the front side of that bulkhead, too. Too bad for them. Displayed at Nellis, there is a disabled T-62 that is a bit gruesome when one looks inside. It took a kill through the armour on the side; looked like a single shot. The tank interior was described like a convective oven for its killing effect. VL |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: P-47/51 deflection shots into the belly of the German tanks,
reality or fiction? From: "Emmanuel Gustin" Date: 8/5/03 3:16 PM Pacific Apparently more tanks were abandoned undamaged than were actually destroyed by the fighter-bombers. So the main effect appears to have been a moral one. The strafing and bombing scared the tank crews so much that they drove the tanks into cover and often jumped out and hid in the nearest ditch. And perhaps did not survive the attack. I'd call that a pretty effective attack. Wouldn't you? (grin) Arthur Kramer Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"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. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
In message , Emmanuel Gustin
writes 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. General Bayerlein tried to move Panzer Lehr the short distance by road from Vire to Le Beny-Bocage (it's a short trip, I've passed the junction several times). As he put it, "...by the end of the day I had lost 40 petrol wagons and 90 other trucks. Five of my tanks had been knocked out, as well as 84 half-tracks, prime movers and SP guns." Apparently more tanks were abandoned undamaged than were actually destroyed by the fighter-bombers. So the main effect appears to have been a moral one. The strafing and bombing scared the tank crews so much that they drove the tanks into cover and often jumped out and hid in the nearest ditch. And perhaps did not survive the attack. To say nothing of the problems of keeping tanks fuelled when the bowsers are burning wrecks some miles behind... -- When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite. W S Churchill Paul J. Adam |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|