I would like to apologize straight away, but this is a holy war... GA aircraft.

[Skoshi Tiger]

To be 'effective' a plane would have to achieve its goals. I guess the 'effect' that was trying to be obtained was winning the war.

So the 2 possible answeres would be the Il2 and any soviet aircraft.

This doesn't have anything to do with the abilities of the individual aircraft, just realizing their goal!

[Then throught the use of pure logic Skoshi then went on to prove 1 = 2, black is equal to white and that god did not exist. At which point the universe ...................]

[DKoor]

IL-2.
When it comes to attacking ground targets, it's gotta be IL-2 for me in that selection of planes.

[Igo kyu]

DKoor wrote:

...that selection of planes.

Yeah, that list needs the Hawker Typhoon, and the P47.

[FPSOlkor]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

Yeah, that list needs the Hawker Typhoon, and the P47.

It does not, because there were no Typhoons or P47s on the EF

[Antoninus]

I voted for the Fw-190, mainly because of it's greater flexibility plus the higher bombload and ability to defend itself.

Even the ground attack versions were still good fighters but could also be used as dive bomber/fighter bomber with a decent bombload. Especially it could carry heavy bombs other than the Il-2. Planes like the Sturmovik might be perfectly adapted to their niche but you need specialized planes for each mission, while good fighter bombers can be used in almost any role where they are currently needed most. You can achieve more with less planes, concentrate production and supply chain on less different types. A more efficient contribution to the war effort.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by Antoninus

...while good fighter bombers can be used in almost any role where they are currently needed most. You can achieve more with less planes, concentrate production and supply chain on less different types. A more efficient contribution to the war effort.

I disagree with that idea, it's an accountant's view, but if you don't have considerable air superiority, it means making targets out of otherwise servicable fighters.

Originally Posted by FPSOlkor

It does not, because there were no Typhoons or P47s on the EF

No offence intended, but why limit the question to only the Eastern Front? Even so, there were, apparently, lend lease P47s sent to Russia, and they are modelled in IL2 Forgotten Battles.

[FPSOlkor]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

No offence intended, but why limit the question to only the Eastern Front? Even so, there were, apparently, lend lease P47s sent to Russia, and they are modelled in IL2 Forgotten Battles.

Because, as I written in the initial post I'm making an article about one book, which describes SU and Ge ground attack airplanes. And I have to say that so far the people on the forum had shown more common sence or knowlege of history then the authors.
P47s were never used as GA airplanes on EF, and I'm not talking about a game, but about RL.

[Antoninus]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

I disagree with that idea, it's an accountant's view, but if you don't have considerable air superiority, it means making targets out of otherwise servicable fighters.

Especially if you don't have considerable air superiority fighter bombers are superior to specialized ground attack aircraft. A Ju-87 or Il-2 is just an easy target for enemy fighters, with or without bombs. The Fw-190 can still defend itself once the pilot drops his bombload, at least a fighter's higher speed gives him a better chance to escape if attacked. And it can still be used as a fighter if necessary. During the late Crimean campaign Fw-190 pilots from the ground attack wing SG-2 claimed more than 200 soviet aircraft shot down.

[Feuerfalke]

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger

To be 'effective' a plane would have to achieve its goals. I guess the 'effect' that was trying to be obtained was winning the war.

So the 2 possible answeres would be the Il2 and any soviet aircraft.

This doesn't have anything to do with the abilities of the individual aircraft, just realizing their goal!

[Then throught the use of pure logic Skoshi then went on to prove 1 = 2, black is equal to white and that god did not exist. At which point the universe ...................]

You read to many "[ENTER PLANE NAME HERE] won the war!"-Threads.

The mission of a ground-attack-fighter is not to win a war but to destroy a ground-target. So the logic way to approach this would be to compare numbers of planes against numbers of ground-units destroyed compared to losses.

[Thunderbolt56]

IL2 for sure. Read all the first-person accounts of German wehrmacht soldiers all the way up to the end of the war and they say the IL2s were murderous. The stukas were really only effective early and desperately needed local air superiority to be effective. The FW's were basically modified from the fighter role and while effective at times in certain situations, were extremely limited in their loadouts and amounts of ordnance they could carry.

The IL2 was more effective.