Jump to content

Disappointing Stuka G-1


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

But remember that the comparisons were a little harsh. It doesn't really matter if the target is destroyed by their aircraft or not but rather whether or not it accomplished its mission.

Post Bulge analysis confirmed that arty didn't really destroy as many AFVs as thought but rather caused many to be abandoned with only minor damage. Regardless this is still a knocked out tank. It may not be destroyed but if it is in your hands rather than the enemy's it might as well be.

Aircraft can reliably be credited with having a great impact on the tactical battlefield even if they didn't blow many enemy tanks into smoldering wreckage. Comparing actual kills to mission effectivness is often like comparing apples to oranges, the two don't always mesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most effective use of airpower against tanks was to attack the soft-skinned supply convoys that supported them. They were easily shot up, and without them the tanks were useless.

I think in the Bulge the greatest (or second greatest?) cause of loss of German tanks was destruction by their crews who were forced to abandon them after they ran out of gas.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before two bad experiences with the Stuka´s perfomance, I have done some test. The airplane seems to aim excellently not problem, but the cannon didn´t penetrate the armor, only get some armor flankin at top hull.

Before 16 strafes with veteran crew I got a lot of impacts but only three became immobile, and only one partial penetration give me a crew hit.

Was the stuka´s 37mm cannon so ineffective vs T-34?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by TheCrow:

Before 16 strafes with veteran crew I got a lot of impacts but only three became immobile, and only one partial penetration give me a crew hit.

Was the stuka´s 37mm cannon so ineffective vs T-34?

Crikey - you call three immobed medium tanks, plus a fourth missing its commander, from only 16 runs, 'ineffective'?! You have very high standards!

WWII aviators - and the grunts they were supporting - would have been ecstatic with that kind of return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes the attacks with the greatest actual effects were against the supply organs of the Panzer formations but attacks on the combat formations had great effects as well. Panzers didn't hide in trees because they were afraid their supply trucks would get shot up.

Regardless of the actual damage caused by air attack to AFVs the perception of the ability of aircraft to destroy vehicles severly effected their willingness and ability to operate.

It isn't as though the German combat formations were saying, "hey guys, aircraft only actually kill about one in ten vehicles so just ignore them." Post battle analysis too often fails entirely to find the reality of what happend during the actual fighting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you call three immobed medium tanks, plus a fourth missing its commander, from only 16 runs, 'ineffective'?! You have very high standards!

Yes, each strafe fires two shoots (32), I got about 80% of hits (25,6). Track hits got immobile tanks, and all other (22) didn´t penetrate any armor location, include one quarter top hits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's kinda silly to pit one game against another, but try flying the Ju87G in IL2 and doing a strafing run. I think you'll find that an 80% hit rate is extremely high.

Playing a (relatively) realistic sim game has given me some insight into the difficulties airpower has in making a difference on the battlefield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes i said before than it aim perfectly, but his target was in open steppe, clear day, and without flak fire.

Exactly, although they got a lot of hits didn´t destroy any T-34, is the stuka´s 37mm cannon undermodelled, could it destroy this tank? I always thought than this airplane was a great tank buster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by TheCrow:

The Stuka G-1 was design to destroy armor, but in cmbb seem only useful vs light tanks (t-70) and another soft armored vehicles. There is something strange at this, is the stuka G-1 undermodelled at this game?

That seems consistent with the perfomance of similar caliber ATGs. Granted the planes supposedly went after the more vulnerable top and rear armor, but they were also firing from further away.

I don't see the problem.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Tweety:

The only medium tanks I ever saw it KO were, ofcourse, my panzers. :mad:

I am beginning to wonder if the folks who complain about too much friendly fire from the fly boys may not have a point. I haven't seen enough statistics, either from the RW or the game, to take a position on this yet, but I'm starting to wonder if BFC didn't turn up the volume on this one just a tad too high.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Tweety:

The only medium tanks I ever saw it KO were, ofcourse, my panzers. :mad:

I am beginning to wonder if the folks who complain about too much friendly fire from the fly boys may not have a point. I haven't seen enough statistics, either from the RW or the game, to take a position on this yet, but I'm starting to wonder if BFC didn't turn up the volume on this one just a tad too high.

Michael </font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by TheCrow:

I thought than Stuka G-1, armed with two 37mm cannon, was a great tankbuster

To pile on here, if it was so great the Germans would probably not have found the need to experiment with 50mm and 75mm guns on Hs-129s (and some other aircraft, too). IIRC, they were not standardized rigs, but did see a bit of action and were obviously more capable of taking out the heavier tanks.

I also seem to recall something about a huge recoilless rifle (~280-300mm?) that was strapped to the bottom of a Do-217 and tested as a bunker/tank buster. Needless to say, firing it nearly tore the plane apart! :eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AFAIK the Stuka G1 would make it's attack from the rear giving it the best shot to get the engine or rear turret. However, in CMBB the direction seems to be random.

As for FF incedents, the best way to avoid is 1) Large or Huge map (2000+ pts), 2) only as Attacker, and 3) Crack or better pilots.

cheers,

-gabe-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also tested the Stuka against different soviet armor. Early T-34 with the cast turret was the only one getting KOt. Also Sherman took some damage. But JS and other heavier stuff didn't really give a crap.

I also had too high expectations on the 37mm guns and the special ammo (cant remember what the metal was). In the future I'm going to stick to the dool ol' bomber versions if any.

Aircrafts are somewhat useless in CMBB when compaired to the price but theyre quite fun when they succeed =)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...