Stuka on the east front

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Maybe the radio was not concerned such a big issue, who knows. Early war radios seen on captured VVS planes Finns got showed them of being of very bad quality, merely parts glued to a cardboard like board etc. Later models did not show much of an improvement on the captured LagG-3's compared to FuG the Bf109G-2/6 had.

[MiloMorai]

S!

 

 FiFi, there is a book about Waffen-SS troops in Eastern Front. Focuses on their combat merits and difficulties rather than stamping them evil. Find book by Jonathan Trigg called Hitler's Vikings - The history of the Scandinavian Waffen-SS: The Legions, the SS-Wiking and the SS-Nordland. Published in English by The History Press. Really worth reading.

 

I use the book as a loophole how Rudel managed to get so many kills. In the book was described an incident of a Waffen-SS tank commander setting up an ambush with Panther's under his command to the advancing Russian forces 1944. He let the scouting tanks to pass not to alert the main force coming behind and engaged when they arrived. Result: Zero lost Panthers and 109 destroyed T-34's left on the battle field. Why? Because they had no frigging radios on the T34's and the Panther's 75mm gun popped them open like tincans. So I bet Rudel had success because before the tank crews even realised what was going on he had been able to take out a few already. Does not help if one tank has radio and the rest do not

 

Fertilizer, be sure.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 No idea what you mean with that comment MiloMorai 

[Fifi]

Didn't know about the lack of radios in Russians tanks! 

 

 

However on the Stukas, I was thinking about the gameplay reading the thread here and i was wondering if we have any hints on what to expect out of the campaign and SP missions. You know coordination and such outside the means of self-support like on CloD over TF forums. Stukas bring up a good example for the question.

 

Yes, radio coordination was the key for Stukas successful attacks.

Furthermore in Stalingrad battle, where Germans troops were so close to Russians ones!

In the Stalingrad chapter, Rudel said he had to be constantly in radio touch with ground troops, to avoid any friendly bombing.

And so often he had to dive alone and verify himself what kind of targets/nationality they were going to bomb, before giving the bombing start...

At this time it was very doable because Stukas were still not very annoyed by Ivans fighters   

 

I'd like to see all this in BOS as well!

Edited December 29, 2013 by Fifi

[[JG2]R7_Blackadder]

But we don't have hints on MP gameplay about this am I right ?

[Quax]

 I don't think Hartmann would have downed 300 planes against the English...without any wound or any critical plane damage.

 

Hartmann did fight 8 Mustangs until bingo fuel. When he saw the Mustangs bouncing him and his wingman, he did send his wingman home to save his life. He didn´t get a single bullet either. But without fuel he had to jump out and was lucky then, that the americans didnt shoot him at the parachute.

 

Last day of the war he attacked a few hundred american bombers covered by a few hundred Mustangs together with his wingman (the only two germans airborne in the area) without getting a scratch. (as far as i remember he got one Mustang and wounded one bomber)  I don´t think anyone did match his skills and tactics.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Quax

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Hartmann shot down a few Mustangs himself too. He mentioned the lack or performance of the Bf109G at that time compared to Western planes. Only his flying skills saved him from the demise and the lucky event the US pilot did not strafe him in his chute.

[Finkeren]

You are right, Fifi and Blackadder,

To forgive me and coming back to the subject of this thread, let me show you this file found in the swf.gtp folder :

 

&id=ju87d3_bk37

&name=2 x 37mm 3.7cm BK gun pods

&description=2 gun pods with 3.7cm BK guns

Ammo: 6 of 37mm rounds (High Explosive or Armour Piercing)

Projectile weight: 41 g (AP) and 55 g (HE)

Muzzle velocity: 1146 m/s

Guns weight: 295 kg

Ammo weight: 10 kg

Pods weight: 190 kg

Rate of fire: 160 rpm

Total additional weight of weapon modification: 850 kg

 

Nice find, but the projectile weights seem to be quite a bit off, don't they? I don't have the numbers for the BK gun, but I just read up on the Sh-37 and NS-37 today, and their AP projectiles weigh in at a hefty 750g.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Looks like a bit too light to me as well. I would expect them to be in the same range as the Russian 37mm guns.

[JtD]

Projectile:

Standard AP: 710g

Hartkern AP: 410g, Tungsten core accounting for 231g

 

Cartridge:

Standard AP: 1560g

Hartkern AP: 1290g

Edited December 30, 2013 by JtD

[CreepiJim]

This is an interesting read: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/tankbusters.htm

 

As JtD wrote, the projectile weight was about 405-410g.

[ACG_KaiLae]

S!

 

 Hartmann shot down a few Mustangs himself too. He mentioned the lack or performance of the Bf109G at that time compared to Western planes. Only his flying skills saved him from the demise and the lucky event the US pilot did not strafe him in his chute.

 

Which brings up a interesting point for the OP. What Eric Hartmann said was that at the start of the war you literally had nothing to fear if you got a russian plane behind you, because most of them did not have effective gunsights. So even if you ended up in a bad spot, you likely were good because all they could do is spray and pray. Apparently one of the biggest things that lend lease provided to the russians was not just the aircraft, but gunsight design so that they could actually fit their planes with effective ones.

[IVJG4-Knight]

stuka vs la-5 aspect :

I'm not an expert but the actual la-5 performance figures are obtained in ideal corcumstances.

In combat : All of the engine controls (throttle, mixture, propeller pitch, radiator and cowl flaps, and supercharger gearbox) had separate levers which served to distract the pilot during combat to make constant adjustments or risk suboptimal performance. For example, rapid acceleration required moving no less than six levers. In contrast, contemporary German aircraft, especially the BMW 801 radial-engined variants of the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 front line fighter, had largely automatic engine controls with the pilot operating a single lever and electromechanical devices, like the Kommandogerät pioneering engine computer on the radial-engined Fw 190s, making the appropriate adjustments.

I'm a good virtual pilot but managing all those six levers for rapid acceleration would be a nightmare.

 

while flying online i rarely fly stukas because i love air to air action, but in the 2 missions i encoutered enemy planes : spitefires one i shot down (mk 16 ) with d5's 20mm cannons , and one shot me down after a very long fight(mk9).If i would fly vs a la5 that needs to manage 6 levers with a pilot i know is badly trained and with a not so sofisticated gunsight i would not be so woried.

 

My conclusion is that Rudel is actualy right.Because  the russians in ww2 did not have good training schools for pilots, methods,and somewhat rudimentary equipment.So the pilots were not as skilled as american, british.

For example  group commander of III/JG1 : captain Karl-Heinz Weber with 136 victories on eastern front was shot down in his first west front mission by mustangs.

Edited December 30, 2013 by IVJG4-Knight

[Fifi]

Yes, and i believe him on that point.

It is well known German pilots were a lot more skilled than Russians. Even against English when they started BOB, because of previous battles in Poland but mainly because of Spain battle "training"! Lots of pilots were coming from Condor Legion at first.

But English were very prompt to train their new crews, and they had at this time better planes than Russians and they were better equiped (aiming sight is very important material).

 

What impressed me, is that Stukas pilots on the Est front didn't feel the same "seating ducks" situation VS fighters as in BOB.

Russian fighters were not feared by Stukas as English ones in BOB. I could even say they were almost non existant in the Stukas skies until probably end of Stalingrad battle. 

And if they appeared, many were so bad shooters they didn't really worried Stukas.

Would be interesting to know how many stukas were shot down on the Est front VS BOB?

[Finkeren]

What Eric Hartmann said was that at the start of the war you literally had nothing to fear if you got a russian plane behind you, because most of them did not have effective gunsights. So even if you ended up in a bad spot, you likely were good because all they could do is spray and pray. Apparently one of the biggest things that lend lease provided to the russians was not just the aircraft, but gunsight design so that they could actually fit their planes with effective ones.

 

Well, to be honest, what would Erich Hartmann know about, how things were at the start of the war? When Operation Barbarossa launched, he was still in basic flight school, and he didn't even see combat on the Eastern front until the middle of October 1942.

 

It's true, that some early Soviet gun sights were of poor quality, especially the glass parts, and most designs had a very small glass surface, meaning you had to keep your head quite still to actually see the recticle. However, as crude and hard to use as they were, early Soviet gun sights weren't "ineffective", they definately pointed at where your shots would land. Also the anecdotes about VVS fighters going into combat without fuctioning gun sights but simply "a crosshair painted on the windscreen" is likely a complete fabrication. All fighters of the day, including VVS ones had iron sights to supplement the reflector sight in case of malfunction,

 

The Soviet gun sights did get better as the war progressed, but they weren't copies of allied sights but rather inspired by German ones.

 

The main problem for the VVS pilots was not inferior equipment (even though that was often also the case) but inferior training and tactics, and often also a lack of proper radio communications.

 

Erich Hartmann himself could propably attest to the importance of experience to combat effectiveness: In his very first combat, he actually got behind an enemy fighter with a 100% clear shot at point blank range, and he still managed to miss completely and nearly collided with the Soviet plane. That Soviet pilot propably got the exact same impression that you just quoted from the German perspective, that German rookie pilots couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. In his first 3 months at the front, Hartmann scored a grand total of 2 victories. It took time to build up the experience necessary to an effective combat pilot, and unlike their German counterparts, very few VVS pilots made it that far.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Finkeren

[[JG2]R7_Blackadder]

Surely Stukas could feel less endangered because cover was more effective ?

[beepee]

Projectile:

Standard AP: 710g

Hartkern AP: 410g, Tungsten core accounting for 231g

 

Cartridge:

Standard AP: 1560g

Hartkern AP: 1290g

I have different figures here from 'Flying Guns Of WWII' by Anthony G Williams & Dr. Emmanual Gustin.

 

Calibre: 37x 263B       Weight gm: APCR/ 405gm (Hartkern loading)

                                                       APHE/ 680gm

                                                       HE     / 640gm  

This is from Appendix 2 in the book. I can't vouch for it's accuracy, but the book is very detailed, and Anthony Williams' website seems to be the go-to place for these figures.

 

[beepee]

Ok, since I can't figure how to embed the video i was trying to post, here's a link:

http://youtu.be/ccOXrfBZoLE

[Fifi]

Surely Stukas could feel less endangered because cover was more effective ?

 

Well, according again to Rudel's memories, his Stuka staffel almost never got any cover on the Est front (even though they had the aerial superiority).

Or they never came and took off, or they missed the meeting point with Stukas...

He is often complaining about this, with a grain of mockery in his book.

Edited December 31, 2013 by Fifi

[[JG2]R7_Blackadder]

Well i'd say understandable, no matter the risk... considered the losses with cover during BoB and losses without during Barbarossa at least that doesn't sum it up good for the Soviet flight school.

 

Keeping in mind the purges, give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar,

[JtD]

I have different figures here from 'Flying Guns Of WWII' by Anthony G Williams & Dr. Emmanual Gustin.

 

This is from Appendix 2 in the book. I can't vouch for it's accuracy, but the book is very detailed, and Anthony Williams' website seems to be the go-to place for these figures.

I took the numbers from the German ammunition data sheets. 405g is the nominal weight of the Hartkern training round. The projectile weight has tolerances, though, and 405g is also within the tolerances of the real thing.

 

The other data you quote from that book seems to be based on rough figures from an Allied summary of German equipment and/or on 37mm Flak/PaK rounds.

[beepee]

 

The other data you quote from that book seems to be based on rough figures from an Allied summary of German equipment and/or on 37mm Flak/PaK rounds.

It could well be.

 

The authors also use the same sources as you have too, and the Bibliography in the book is extensive,  so I don't know why there are differences.

 

Anyway, they also mention armour penetration from tests with different ammo types:

 

Here are some penetration (ooer) stats for the BK 3.7 as used on the Ju87G:

 

APCR (Hartken) rounds:   95mm penetration @ 600m range, 90° angle, this reduced to 47mm penetration @ 60° angle

 

APHE rounds:                   50mm penetration @  500m range, 90° angle, this reduced to 40mm penetration @ 60° angle

 

350-450m range was considered optimum for accuracy, but as more heavily armoured tanks appeared, pilots reduced harmonisation range. Rudel set his to 100m.

 

Anyway, Happy New Years to all Stuka fans!!

[BigPickle]

really looking forward to hearing the dive siren going on this beast!

Edited January 4, 2014 by BigPickle

[SKG51_robtek]

really looking forward to hearing the dive siren going on this beast!

You might get disappointed, at that time the Stuka didn't have the sirens anymore.

[CreepiJim]

Ju-87 were used throughout the war with and without jericho trumpets. Most were disabled because of drag and pilots becoming deaf. They could not deactivate them quite often when the pneumatic system failed.

[Pierre64]

You might get disappointed, at that time the Stuka didn't have the sirens anymore.

According to this file found in swf.gtp, (data\swf\common\modifications\ju87d3_siren), this mod could be available some day...

 

info.locale=eng.txt

 

&id=ju87d3_siren

&name=Siren

&description=Special hydraulic-actuated siren for demoralizing enemies in dive attacks

Total additional weight of weapon modification: 20 kg

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Ok, since I can't figure how to embed the video i was trying to post, here's a link:

http://youtu.be/ccOXrfBZoLE

 

I don't think much of that video is a stuka to be honest.

[CreepiJim]

Especially the single shot parts, which was clearly not a Bk37. But then again, not much real footage survived.

[Freycinet]

Well, to be honest, what would Erich Hartmann know about, how things were at the start of the war? When Operation Barbarossa launched, he was still in basic flight school

Ehhh, he had personal access to lots of first-hand witnesses. Other pilots and other Luftwaffe crew who were there from the start. Or do you think that you and other armchair generals have a better idea than someone who was actually there?

[6./ZG26_Emil]

This is Ju87 guncam footage

 

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Forget IL2s !! Stukas rule !!! 

 

 

2 kills at same time !! Ah the good old days 

Edited January 14, 2014 by JG62Gielow