Really? Other sources claim the Ju 87 was the A 10 of its time and even influenced the development of the A 10.
Here is some Il2 info:
The Il2's 20 mm and its unguided rockets:
The Il2's 37 mm's:
The question being if it can survive long enough to come back for seconds....
This is what happens when you get you historical "data" from Wikipedia..
The very first models of the IL2 is what's beeing described here, it had 20mm cannons, and no rear gunner, but here's the thing! it only flew for a very short period in 1941 and the very start of 1942, then it was replaced by better versions, armed with the 23mm Vya cannons (easilly capable of busting anything from the Panzer-4 and below, and had decent results against the Tiger and Panther too), and a rear gunner position was installed.
Also, the RS-82 rocket inaccuracy is a half truth at best, the problem existed for the first couple of months of the war, then it was discovered that the stabilizing fins on the rockets where getting damaged durring transport, new transport boxes where quickly made fixing the problem, and they worked fine after that.
And lest we forget, the IL2, unlike the Stuka or any other plane of the war, had a giant armour "bathtub" incasing the engine, wingroots and pilot, and thick armoured glass, it was allmost impossible to shoot it down with small arms fire, only cannon rounds really made any dent in it, not to mention the pilot could vent a non-flamable gas into the fuel tanks before starting his attack so there would be no flamable fumes to ignite it, it was without any doubt the most robust and heavilly armoured plane of the war, and despite that, it managed respectable cruise and combat speeds.
Perhabs you should read up on what Eric Hartmann had to say about the IL2, i'll give you a hint: He hated them! and said they where neigh impossible to shoot down unless you could attack from its belly, and even then, you would just send him limping home with a busted oil cooler.
As for the Il2 having bombs and rockets yes but surely not equipped with both at the same time! Couple all this with the cannons, MGs, rear MGs, crew, full fuel, armor, ammo for everything, the fact that its underpowered already.....The thing would not even take off.
I never said anything about carrying both rockets and bombs at the same time, the Type 3M could not do that, unlike the other IL2 variants, only one or the other, but unlike the Stuka G, it could cary bombs OR rockets alongside thouse giant cannons.
But its true that it was not a smash success, simply because the good old 23mm Vya armed variants where getting the job done cheaper and better.
What about the Ju 87G's BK 3.7 cannon? The most common Soviet tank being the T-34 which has about 20 mm of roof (top of turret/hull) armor. The BK 3.7 was armed with armour-piercing tungsten cored ammunition at a muzzle velocity of 850 m/sec. Now comparing the BK 3.7 to a 'normal' Panzer III 37 mm cannon:
There's certainly nothing wrong with that cannon, it was just outnumbered by the thousands by all the Vya 23mm cannons installed in the IL2's, all of which where doing the job admireably, packed more ammo, and came attached to a much more robust and much faster aircraft, with heavier defensive armament, and an explosive payload of assorted goodies.
I am pretty sure that a single 250 kg (551 lb) bomb would cause extreme damage if not etc etc etc (too long to quote, getting very long this post is!)
Its a mute point, the IL2 also carried bombs, similar payload infact (600 Kg's), but ofcourse it did so whilst also carrying its Vya 23 cannons.
But the problem with bombs is getting them on target, now you might think the Stuka has an advantage here, but you'd be very wrong, dive bombing is great for taking out stationary targets like buildings, but its a whole different ball game when trying to hit small mobile targets like tanks.
Infact Jabo's and IL2's had more luck with it than the Stuka's, since setting up a good dive to hit the target was just very bloody hard to do!
In conclusion, I would think the Ju87/Il2 would be quite fair if not comparable to each other in anti tank capabilities.
And you'd be very wrong, the Stuka was a light strategic bomber, a dive bomber, that is what it was made for, that is what it was good at, but it was not a good ground attack aircraft, it lacked the armour, the armament, and dive bombing just does not lend itself very well to that task, Jabo versions of fighters where actually doing a better job of it (but lacked that sweet 23mm punch of the IL2).
The IL2 on the other hand was build to do nothing else, and it excelled at it! it had the armour, the armament, and it was robust enough to pull it off, the Russians had it right, they knew you needed big guns, lots of ammo and rockets to do the job, a recipy we are still following to this day.
Planes like the A-10 or SU-25 Frogfoot are following in the footsteps of the IL2, because it was the first true ground attack aircraft, not the Stuka, you dont see A-10 dive bombing targets, do you?
not only here but in the mod thread, i remember this because i was heavily involved in the debate.
