View Single Post
  #4  
Old 17th August 2007, 22:56
tcolvin tcolvin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Topsham, England
Posts: 422
tcolvin is on a distinguished road
Re: Placing the Bell P39 Aircobra.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Franek Grabowski View Post

Pe-2 used mostly as a level bomber and in the same 'shallow' league as Ju 88. Ar-2 hardly widespread and quickly phased out.

Mate, tell me what major power used dive bombers for ground support, apart of early use of Ju 87s?
In the interesting " Conversations with N. G. Golodnikov" by Andrei Sokhorukov at http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/englis...ikov/part4.htm, Golodnikov does not deny, and therefore assents to, the statement by Sokhorukov made in the following extract, that the Pe-2 was employed as a vertical dive bomber just like the Ju-87.

A.S. This question is not exactly on topic, but in your view, was the Ju-88 a better dive bomber than the Pe-2?
N.G. The Ju-88 never dropped bombs from a dive, only in horizontal flight.
A.S. Well, according to reference book data, the Ju-88 was a dive bomber.
N.G. Aren’t you a little confused? The Germans’ dive bomber was the Ju-87 Laptezhnik. This aircraft only bombed out of a dive. It bombed very accurately, but was also very slow. It was relatively easy to shoot down. In my opinion, the Germans stopped using it in the North sometime in mid-1944.
The Ju-88? I never saw it drop bombs from a dive and never heard that it was used that way either.



Franek; would you please provide evidence that the Pe-2 was not employed as a vertical dive-bomber like the Ju-87, Vengeance and Skua. No one on this forum is permitted ex cathedra statements which contradict Shores. Your evidence, please.





Tony
Reply With Quote