Replies

The first to coordinate close air support with armor.

Saw an interesting analysis on youtube about how armor (all sides) was destroyed, taken from a 1951 US Army analysis. It said that the vast majority (something like 65-70%) was destroyed by other Armor or Anti-tank weaponry. Another 15-20% was from mines and 10% from infantry with improvised methods. A very small percentage (<5%) was attributed to airplane. The effect was more psychological

Clearly, that changed with changes in technology.

True, but that statistic (US armor destroyed by air attacks, compared to all US armor lost) was greatly distorted by the fact that much German armor and artillery and armor/artillery support (trucks and trains and supplies) was destroyed by US and UK air attacks BEFORE it ever attack US tanks and tank destroyers. Once in close combat, US armour and armored trucks were destroyed by the far more capable German armor in tank-tank combat. (Often 3-1 and 4-1 loss ratios.)

US armor was recovered and repaired and re-manned with new crews, then sent back in combat 2, 3, and 4 times. German armor after Normandy and Italy? Almost never.

Russian air-ground attacks were much more effective than German Stuka attacks after the 41 campaign; which declined even more in the 42 summer campaign and almost vanished after 44. In Africa, it depended on whether the UK (then later poor US armor with little fighter-bomber support) was fighting Italian or German forces, and whether the fighting was close to Tunisia or close to Alexandria, and whether those Italian or German forces had aviation fuel or not.

So the yearly ratios in each front are very different as well.

And the Germans wrote the book on close air support -- Von Manstein used coordinated air support at least as early as 1942. More generally, the USSR tank losses were largely due to Germany infantry tactics and artillery, rather than armor-to-armor clashes; Soviet tank losses due to Luftwaffe probably exceeded losses to German tanks.

“A very small percentage (<5%) was attributed to airplane. The effect was more psychological”

The most important tank is the one you don’t have. Tanks have cross-country mobility, but their supply trucks largely do not, so tank formations are tethered to the road net such as it is. A flight of Ja-Bos is better off going after the tank column’s fuel tankers and ammo train. The tanks they are supporting will run out of fuel & ammo in a very short period of time.

So yes, the airplane destroyed very few tanks until the advent of the guided missile. But the aircraft has blunted many massed armored thrusts.