Stuka tankbuster in Barbarossa

balom

Banned
What if the Germans had the Ju87 G-1 tankbuster available at the beginning of Barbarossa. Would that compensate for the inadequacy of their armor and take a higher tole on KV and t-34 tanks?

24Ju87.jpg
 
Well, they would definitely make an impact. The Germans and Soviets would see how very effective these planes are against tanks, and will be mass producing them ASAP.
However, I doubt this will make much difference in Barbarossa. The Germans practically advanced as fast as they could (within Hitler's guidelines of course) already.
 
But why would they develop them? they thought their tanks are strong enough to defeat Soviet tanks.

and 37mm cannon used on them was still in use by German ground troops in 1941. Considered obsolete but still in use nonetheless
 
True, but I don't think the threadstarter is very interested in how and why the Germans developed them so soon.
He just wants to know what effect they would have in battle. Think of it as an ASB "what if a few geschwader of tank poppers got zapped back in time to 1941" type question.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Not much difference actually. The Heer went through the Red Army like it was wet tissue paper as is. Once the offensive stalled, as much from logistics as from opposition, the Stuka would not be much help. It might have helped some in the Winter of 1942, when it could fly, against the Soviet counter offensive in the Stalingrad area.
 
I'm sure it would have been effective in the early days of Barbarossa, but long-term it wouldn't have mattered. Remember a tankbuster is a tactical aircraft, so it's not very effective for long distance campaigns. Remember once the Soviet industry got going, they could produce more tanks and planes than the Germans could destroy.

It might have even further diluted the German armaments production cause it would have meant one more thing to produce, and their industrial capacity was stretched thin as it was. The Germans were still producing tanks in 1944-45 that they used to invade France and the Low Countries in 1940, and my favorite statistic is they made over 100 versions of motorcycles.
 
Well, they would definitely make an impact. The Germans and Soviets would see how very effective these planes are against tanks, and will be mass producing them ASAP.
However, I doubt this will make much difference in Barbarossa. The Germans practically advanced as fast as they could (within Hitler's guidelines of course) already.

I'm not even sure they would make much of an impact since, as you said, Barbarossa advanced perfectly well with out them.

Also the Ju87G was a total pig in the air, lacking even the marginal flying abilities of the regular Stuka dive bombers. Also the Soviets were already developing and introducing the IL-2, which was a far better tank buster than the Ju-87G. If the Germans did focus only on the Ju87G, rather than develop dedicated anti-tank planes such as the Hs129, the long range effect on German close-support aviation might have been negative.
 
A) Could the regular Stukas be converted to these?
B) If used, could/would these planes have reduced German losses?
 
As mentioned above the HS-129 was the better aircraft.And while the Stuka
G-1 variant was a decent machine it was seriously obsolete before it flew.
I suppose the G-1's would be of some use but no enough to make any real difference.
 
To clarify what i was asking, and please excuse my silly questions born of ignorance:

A) Could the regular Stukas be converted to these?
As i understand it, Stukas were of little use in the latter parts of WWII. Thus, if they can use an obsolete plane and obsolete cannon to make an effective tank-killer, they're making good use of equipment otherwise nigh-useless.

B) If used, could/would these planes have reduced German losses?
Every tank that a Stuka could kill is a tank that can't kill a Panzer. Every Panzer that isn't killed is one that doesn't have to be made. So, can the Stukas kill enough Russian tanks to off-balnce their production costs? It might not help in Barbarossa, but what's the impact later on?

C) Seeing the effectiveness and limitations of these Stukas, would this spur development of more effective aircraft?
 
As mentioned above the HS-129 was the better aircraft.And while the Stuka
G-1 variant was a decent machine it was seriously obsolete before it flew.
I suppose the G-1's would be of some use but no enough to make any real difference.
Obsolete? Maybe in air-to-air combat, but that's not what it's designed for. It's designed for ripping open Russian tanks, and I wouldn't want to be the Soviet tanker in the gunsight of one of these babies.
Sure the Panzerknacker was better, but Stuka's were available in large number in 1941.
And as said before, if planes like these were available from the start of Barbarossa (for whatever reason) it would seriously effect further development of dedicated anti-armor aircraft, like the HS-129, which might make a real difference later on.
 
Actually, Stuka's were never available in large numbers. At their height, approximately 380 were available in 1940. That became about 350 in 1941 (for all fronts) and steadily declined from then on. After initial enthusiasm, the Stuka panzerknacker was eventually only operated by 1 group (about 40 aircraft). While very effective in its tankbusting role, it was vulnerable to marauding Soviet fighters. If used in 1941, they would undoubtedly perform extremely well because tanks were less well armoured compared to 1943/1944 and the Soviet fighters would have a hard time with Luftwaffe fighters.

But it wouldn't have made a difference in 1941 as destroying enemy tanks was not what stopped the Wehrmacht.

In 1943, the Luftwaffe had less than 400 fighters left to cover the entire Eastern front. Any panzerknacker, be it Stuka 87 or Henschel 129, would be vulnerable to enemy fighters under conditions of air inferiority. They would wreak a terrible toll of massed tank formations until Soviet fighters appeared. Then the tables would turn.
 
Top