View Single Post
  #13  
Old 10-30-2013, 06:15 AM
bladeracer bladeracer is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Perth, WestOz
Posts: 66
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Furio View Post
I don’t want to start a flame war, but this seems to me excessively trenchant. Soviet Union won the war with "useless" Sturmoviks, and RAF fielded equally "useless" Typhoons.


Perhaps it would be a good idea to make some experiments under repeatable conditions. Any volunteer?

I think it depends on your definition of "useless". If you mean physically detroying tanks then I would agree.
But I'm sure air attacks were disruptive and damaging to the enemy regardless of whether the tank itself was actually "destroyed".
I think the biggest "effect" though was simply to morale and logistics by forcing the enemy to adapt their movements to allow for potential air attack. Even if the attack never eventuates, or inficts insignificant damage when it does, having to allow for it still burns up vital resources, slows down movement, and affects morale.
Reply With Quote