Quoting Mr. Williams, about the IL2's 23mm guns :

The VYa was a gas-operated, belt-fed gun (a scaled-up 12.7mm Berezin) chambered for a powerful 23x152B cartridge. It is credited with penetrating 30mm at 100m and 25mm at 400m (striking angle unspecified). This was adequate against light tanks but not enough to reliably penetrate medium tanks.

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/tankbusters.htm

__________________
http://www.costnet.com/images/skyhawk-pic.jpg

In his book Vasilii Borisovich Yemelyanenko : In the rough sky of war, 1971, a Il2 pilot himself, claims they did all that. </font>[/quote]Jesus H. Christ, what are you trying to do? Rocking the "Russians were a horde of Muzhiks" boat?

__________________

I was under the impression that tanks used to have thinner sides, rear and especially top, but I may be wrong

__________________

Yes but still, a 30mm penetration is a little short to disable, say, a Panther. Some rounds would still bounce or be deflected, some would penetrate.

Don't forget this 23mm rounds were not artillery shells, and I'm far from sure that 1 round penetration meant the tank was disabled.

That's why, I believe, the author (*) I quoted says it was not enough to RELIABLY penetrate(...) it means it could, but it was not a 100% deal.

Of course this is was nevertheless a much better AT ammo than the P-47's 12.7 mgs.

Anyway, the real killer was the 37mm gun : "enough to pose a threat to the side or rear armour of virtually any tank." according to Mr Williams.

(*) I am confident on his writting after reading his study on the compared effectiveness of WWII air to air guns.

__________________
http://www.costnet.com/images/skyhawk-pic.jpg

When was the 37mm made? & when exactly was it's combat debut? Kursk?

Actually yes, combat debut was in Kursk with 208th Regiment, I can't tell you in which sector.

In any case I don't have much fate on this air-to-tank sniping. Pick up your After the Battle concerning the Falaise Pocket and count the number of Typhoons flying about and the quantity of 60lb rockets fired, and then count the tanks destroyed. Piffling! Lots of trucks blown up, lots of gutted horses, but scarcely a tank.

The classic test figures are 4% rocket hits on test conditions, that is, no one firing back at you! There was an analysis on this by Dr. John D. Salt on the net but I can't find it now, most likely the site where it was is gone.

Remember a tank is a very small object and it is practically stationary on the ground. It's not the same thing as if you are firing at a bomber, which may be slower than you but is flying at a decent speed; and after the bomber you find more air. Now if you align on a tank with an evil intent from say 500m distance (where you can barely see it!) you will have 2-5 seconds before you pull up or you'll slam into the ground, more if you're riding a Ju 87 (but remember Rudel finished his career flying Fw190s for some reason).

The Brits in the Desert were using Hurricanes with 40mm guns, in Italy we simply never hear about them again. In short, I think we pay too much attention to a weapon of dubious effectiveness.

__________________

I've read this report, I believe it was about operation at Mortain, but I didn't want to look like I disagree with the sooooo superior ground attack efficiency of the western allies

Guns were accurate, much more than rockets, and with their rate of fire (more than twice the rate of fire of the Hurri's 40mm gun), along with the fact they were used at very close range, you can't really call this sniping.

As I said above, it looks the 23mm gun was by far more common, and was mainly suited targets hard up to light tnaks (although it could in some case disable a medium or heavy tank by hitting a weakspot).

But still a better AT weapon than the 12.7 mm MG

Anyway, the best payload against heavily armored targets were its bombs (especialy AT cluster) and rockets (as I also said above).

__________________
http://www.costnet.com/images/skyhawk-pic.jpg

I agree with your conclusions, and by sniping I meant 'accurate shooting'

Nevertheless, soft targets were a lot easier to destroy than armoured targets, and 20/23mm ammunition would be terrific against these using HE shells, besides being much more abundant, including mortar and artillery battery areas, trucks, horse transport, etc. Why try to hit the tank when it will be much easier to destroy it's fuel bowser?

__________________

'Why try to hit the tank when it will be much easier to destroy it's fuel bowser?'

That is the best plan on how to win a war. I wish you were in the upper echelons of the Bush administration ! I am really getting tired of his present idiots. [img]redface.gif[/img] The oil companies should finance the war from now on and hire merceneries.

__________________
Work Harder ! Millions on welfare are depending on you.

Who told you this idiot would be any better?

__________________

@ Za : Lord knows how hard I try, but it looks like I can't help agreeing with you on this subject.

__________________
http://www.costnet.com/images/skyhawk-pic.jpg

Choccy, may I invite you to join my management team? Defeat would be a certainty!

P.S. Bring some Freedom Fries!

__________________

Cowboys in command!
You either get...Wounded Knee, or Little Big Horn.
Great choices.
I'll pick door #3.

__________________
There's one way to find out if a man is honest-ask him. If he says "Yes", you know he's a crook. Groucho Marx

lol guys, slight misunderstanding.

I meant I agree on Za's last point about IL-2 guns.

Anyway, I don't mind a little Bush bashing from times to times.

I'll bring my pervert commie traitor freedom fries with, and I won't let a damn yankee barbarian contest the French science for defeat, polished by so many enlightening experiences

__________________
http://www.costnet.com/images/skyhawk-pic.jpg

No, Choccy, the approved expression is Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys ROFLMAO

or

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...render+monkeys
http://www.davidstuff.com/france.htm
http://superfrenchie.com/?p=8

etc, etc, etc

But that was a nice 'quid pro quo' that had a funny outcome. I love this forum

__________________