Il-2 pilots with 10 or more aerial kills

[James A Pratt III]

Also note: German Panzer included a number of full tracked and half tracked AA vehicles mounting 20mm and 37mm Flak.

[James A Pratt III]

Yes nowadays as in the Ukraine tanks are rather vulnerable to drone/air attack.

Ooops! from above I should have said a few German and Russian Tanks carried MGs on the tops of their turrets. The British were the same. US LL tanks used by the Russians and British often did not carry them.

Ooops! again it should be German Panzer Divisions.

[knusel]

Hello,

does the calibre of a gun define its ability to penetrate tank armour ?

Michael

[Juha]

The calibre of the gun, its muzzle velocity and the weight and the design of the shell/shot.

[knusel]

Is a tank automatically disabled when a bullet penetrates its armour ?

[James A Pratt III]

No. It sort of depends where the tank is hit. If a round penatrates the armor and detenates the ammo or sets the tank on fire. This will destroy a tank. If a tank takes a hit that wrecks an engine or breaks a track or if the driver is KIA this will disable a tank. Note it often takes more that one round to destroy a tank and it also depends what sort of tank it is and what it gets hit by and where.

I can see where a IL-2 hits the engine deck of say a Pz IV with a rocket and wrecks the engine. Note the rockets were very inaccurate.

[knusel]

Hello James,

which part would you aim at when you attack a tank by plane (e.g. a Tiger) ?

Cheers,

Michael

[HGabor]

Sorry to interrupt... but I guess the pilots were happy if they hit the tank ANYWHERE during a fast and low pass under intense defense fire. Aiming a part of a tank from the air...? I think that is just an illusion. (Unless you just aim it in the 'middle' hoping that at least you will not miss it.

Gabor

[knusel]

Hello Gabor,

of course but if memory serves we well I read reports of airmen aiming at the enemy aircraft's "engine", "cockpit", "gunner" or at a distinct engine of a four-engined bomber. Therefore, I thought that it was at least the intention of the tankbuster aces to hit the tanks at a distinct point.

I wish you a good Thursday evening,
Michael

[HGabor]

True, but in a dogfight, or fighter attack the speed difference between the two planes was not significant, as the attacker usually followed (pursued) the victim, having a much better situation for aiming. Plus even smaller caliber ammo (from multiple guns with high firing speed) could set an aluminum plane on fire much easier than a steel tank, which required precise hits with larger ammo - obviously from larger weapons having slower firing speed.
Also, for ground targets, the speed difference between the attacker and the ground target was several hundred km/h (much bigger than in the air), giving a much smaller chance (shorter striking time) to score an efficient hit - if the pilot did not want to crash into his target. Two completely different situations, I would not even compare the two!

Gabor