Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: IL-2 Sturmovik vs Ju-87 Stuka | Forums

  1. #1
    Senior Member DKoor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,493
    Which one is more successful in their attack role? What do you think?
    Lately I've been playing IL-2 campaign and I can't but to notice that IL-2's guns especially in mid-variants and some later variants simply rocks... VyA-23 and NS-23/30 are kick-arse cannons... will kill many things on ground.

    IL-2 also has great anti-tank rocket arsenal... possible to destroy several tanks with it.

    On the other hand, Ju-87 is perhaps on of the best (if not the best) attack aircraft in anti shipping role... very versatile and useful in any kind of very precise, pinpoint bombing where you have to drop enormous bomb load at one spot.

    All things considered I give advantage to IL-2.

    How about you?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    638
    It seems to me that the IL-2 beats Ju-87 on survivability and versatillity.
    I guess much of Ju-87 sucsess can be explained by the german aircrews training.

    I have no hard evidence to back up this thoughts, though.

    Skarphol
    "Trying is the first step towards failure!" Homer Simpson

    Catching lead online as 'JG301_Alf'
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  3. #3
    When talking about survivability,i'll give my vote for the Stuka,because of the crew training and professionality.
    For most of the IL-2's,their avarage live was 3 sorties,and the avarage survivability of the rear gunner was 2 missions maximum.
    You know about the "become a VVS pilot in two days" training program of the soviets then.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  4. #4
    IL2 pretty much. Though extensivly used in WW2, divebombing was given up right after it for a reason. The Stuka was a great divebomber, but not the best ground attack plane for sure.

    A more fitting plane to compare to the IL2 would be the Hs 129
    -----------

    "I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war." -- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  5. #5
    Global Moderator Tully__'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    15,901
    In game terms, I prefer the IL2, it's more versatile and has better cannon. That being said, I've not done a lot of practice with the Stuka style of near vertical dive bombing, so skill set may have something to do with my preference.

    I particularly love the big cannon on the IL2-3M. When I'm on form with that puppy, I can single shot most ground targets about 3 out of 5 strafing runs.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  6. #6
    Originally posted by Tully__:
    In game terms, I prefer the IL2, it's more versatile and has better cannon. That being said, I've not done a lot of practice with the Stuka style of near vertical dive bombing, so skill set may have something to do with my preference.

    I particularly love the big cannon on the IL2-3M. When I'm on form with that puppy, I can single shot most ground targets about 3 out of 5 strafing runs.
    These guns also work great on too bold enemy fighters
    -----------

    "I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war." -- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  7. #7
    Senior Member DKoor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,493
    Anyone tried employing IL-2 as an interceptor?
    I haven't found missions for IL-2I (istrebitel=fighter).
    But seems to me that it could have some success vs Luftwaffe's mediums, granted that it doesn't get intercepted by fighters first...

    About IL-2-3M, yeah it is a sweet ride, I think those were deployed to front when Kursk front opened... they had success vs German armor, however somewhere along the way they were deemed not so successful (and removed from production very shortly after Kursk battle) as their 20/23mm counterparts because of huge recoil and cannon jams... someone correct me if I got that wrong.

    My preferred in game IL-2 ride is IL-2M later series... because rear gunner virtually has no protection from any side but his rear side ... really looks mean. And has best cannons (IMHO) VyA-23.

    Ju-87D5 seems like the best in game option for me... considering huge load selections and 20mm wing mounted cannons.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    11
    Even though I love the Stuka to death, and would rather fly that than the Il2, I think the Il2 has more survivability. They have a better rear gun I think, and I also think their armor plating is far better on the Sturmovik.

    I'd take the Stuka over the Sturmovik for pinpoint precision bombing, and usually that will help win a battle, I think anyway, 9 times out of 10. Look at the A-10 today, it's been around for awhile, could easily have been chopped, but still flying today and will probably keep flying for awhile longer.

    Both are great planes, the Sturmovik will be my 3rd campaign I try after this Stuka campaign is done (which won't be for awhile started in 1941 ).
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  9. #9
    Senior Member DKoor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,493
    I just finished 86th mission in my ongoing Sturmovik campaign... awesome survivability... vulnerable spots on Sturmo are outer parts of the wings and radiator... I also get fairly frequent cannon jams (often happens when under 88m flak fire).

    But what sight it is... 6 IL-2's attacking enemy airfield, they took all small AA (most dangerous) in first pass, then party begins...

    They are real dogs in vertical, have absolutely no chance vs fighters, however in horizontal they may get some chance but also very slim/none. But their guns make up for that, very nice cannon/gun setup. I still fly IL-2's without rear gunners...

    Curiosity about IL-2's are that early versions are noticeably faster than later variants, may be due to more armor... however that means little vs Mk108 equipped LW late war rides.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    638
    Originally posted by DKoor:
    Anyone tried employing IL-2 as an interceptor?
    When I'm bored and want a quick fight I often use the QMB and put myself flying a wide varity of planes up against 4 x B17Gs.
    When flying the Il-2I it's quite easy to down the 4 bombers. Not very realistic, I would guess, but quite funny.

    Skarphol
    "Trying is the first step towards failure!" Homer Simpson

    Catching lead online as 'JG301_Alf'
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •