Excellent video . Probably the most underrated aircraft of WW2 . These destroyed more German tanks than did Russian T34 tanks , which , before they were improved and given larger guns were fairly ineffective against german heavy armour .
Most recent research seems to indicate this might be the most overrated plane of WWII, and that it didn't destroy anywhere near the number of tanks popularly imagined. Even Wikipedia portrays this airplane as not living up to the legend. A couple of excerpts: Other studies of the fighting at Kursk suggest that very few of German armour losses were caused by the IL-2 or any other Soviet aircraft. In fact, total German tank losses in Operation Citadel amounted to 323 destroyed, the vast majority by anti-tank guns and armored fighting vehicles.[25] In addition, it is difficult to find any first-hand accounts by German panzer crews on the Eastern Front describing anything more than the occasional loss to direct air attack. The vast majority, around 95-98%, of tank losses were due to enemy anti-tank guns, tanks, mines, artillery, and infantry assault, or simply abandonment as operational losses (due to causes such as mechanical breakdown or running out of fuel), which mostly happened during the last eleven months of the war. The main problem with the Il-2 was the inaccuracy of its attacks.[citation needed] Towards the end of war, the Soviets were able to concentrate large numbers of Shturmoviks to support their main offensives. The effect, however, was often more psychological than actual physical destruction of targets, particularly against dug-in and armored targets.[citation needed] In the 9 June offensive in the Karelian Isthmus in Finland, Finnish anti-aircraft forces were far too few in number to counter the armadas of Pe-2 and Il-2, but quickly found that the Il-2 attacks generally missed their marks widely, particularly with bombs.[citation needed] While some attacks against large unprotected targets such as horse and truck convoys and railyards had devastating results, attacks against dug-in point targets were usually ineffective.
@@gort8203 Hi , thanks for the reply and info . I only compared their effectiveness in tank destroying to the early T 34 models , ... not to the later T 34s and the many other factors in German Tank losses you cited . Also , Remember Wikipaedia is often not a reliable source . Also , remember that for the purposes of German wartime morale and also anti - soviet propaganda , losses of military equipment were always downplayed or censord by the German High command . Regarding Finland , ... it was near impossible to find and target accurately Finnish military installations in their dense forests . Also the Sturmovik did not begin to become a significant destroyer of tanks until 1944 with the widespread intoduction of the rocket firing armaments . This was the equivalent of the British Typhoons of D - Day and beyond which destroyed much German armor .
I see that the animated L2 has a rotary engine, but the movie views of actual aircraft have inline engines. Why is that?
No views in 4 minutes bro dropped off
Good video. But it's Bah-gra-teeon
ahh didn't know that, thanks!
Excellent video . Probably the most underrated aircraft of WW2 . These destroyed more German tanks than did Russian T34 tanks , which , before they were improved and given larger guns were fairly ineffective against german heavy armour .
Most recent research seems to indicate this might be the most overrated plane of WWII, and that it didn't destroy anywhere near the number of tanks popularly imagined. Even Wikipedia portrays this airplane as not living up to the legend. A couple of excerpts:
Other studies of the fighting at Kursk suggest that very few of German armour losses were caused by the IL-2 or any other Soviet aircraft. In fact, total German tank losses in Operation Citadel amounted to 323 destroyed, the vast majority by anti-tank guns and armored fighting vehicles.[25] In addition, it is difficult to find any first-hand accounts by German panzer crews on the Eastern Front describing anything more than the occasional loss to direct air attack. The vast majority, around 95-98%, of tank losses were due to enemy anti-tank guns, tanks, mines, artillery, and infantry assault, or simply abandonment as operational losses (due to causes such as mechanical breakdown or running out of fuel), which mostly happened during the last eleven months of the war.
The main problem with the Il-2 was the inaccuracy of its attacks.[citation needed] Towards the end of war, the Soviets were able to concentrate large numbers of Shturmoviks to support their main offensives. The effect, however, was often more psychological than actual physical destruction of targets, particularly against dug-in and armored targets.[citation needed] In the 9 June offensive in the Karelian Isthmus in Finland, Finnish anti-aircraft forces were far too few in number to counter the armadas of Pe-2 and Il-2, but quickly found that the Il-2 attacks generally missed their marks widely, particularly with bombs.[citation needed] While some attacks against large unprotected targets such as horse and truck convoys and railyards had devastating results, attacks against dug-in point targets were usually ineffective.
@@gort8203 Hi , thanks for the reply and info . I only compared their effectiveness in tank destroying to the early T 34 models , ... not to the later T 34s and the many other factors in German Tank losses you cited . Also , Remember Wikipaedia is often not a reliable source . Also , remember that for the purposes of German wartime morale and also anti - soviet propaganda , losses of military equipment were always downplayed or censord by the German High command . Regarding Finland , ... it was near impossible to find and target accurately Finnish military installations in their dense forests . Also the Sturmovik did not begin to become a significant destroyer of tanks until 1944 with the widespread intoduction of the rocket firing armaments . This was the equivalent of the British Typhoons of D - Day and beyond which destroyed much German armor .
@@theworldofmetta5969 I think the amount of armor destroyed by Typhoons and P-47s is also overrated.