34. Compare the First and Second World Wars, highlight common and distinct features in: the causes of the war, the nature of the military confrontation, scale, consequences.
35. Describe the impact of the First World War on the spiritual sphere of life in European society. Why did Gertrude Stein call the war veterans the "Lost Generation"?
The First World War had a significant impact on the spiritual atmosphere of Europe. The collapse of hopes, meaning in life, changes in value criteria, moral reorientation, loss of stability and reliability of existence - these are the symbols of the crisis worldview of the first quarter of the 20th century.
The Lost Generation is what the West calls young front-line soldiers who fought between 1914 and 1918, regardless of the country for which they fought, and returned home morally or physically crippled. They are also called “unaccounted casualties of war.” After returning from the front, these people could not live a normal life again. After experiencing the horrors of war, everything else seemed petty and not worthy of attention to them.
36. Compare the “liberal” (USA) and “totalitarian” (Italy, Germany) ways out of the global economic crisis, highlight the common and the different. "Liberal path" of the USA.
The American way relied heavily on the traditions of liberal economic doctrine, and therefore the emphasis was on indirect methods of influencing the economic and social spheres of life. Banking and financial reforms served as the starting point for subsequent transformations. With the help of strong fiscal and monetary policies, the government carried out major investment activities aimed at achieving optimal rates of economic growth; eliminated social tensions by financing programs to help the unemployed, organizing public works, etc. The policy of public financing was supplemented by a complex of legal acts, skillful regulation of the tax system, protectionist measures, etc.
Despite the fact that the results of this direction were not felt immediately, but only after a fairly long period of time, it turned out to be very acceptable in the foreseeable future. Soon the United States almost completely recovered from the consequences of the crisis, as did a number of countries that applied the “New Deal” policy. It should be noted that this direction was chosen by countries with a higher level of economic development and strong democratic traditions.
“Totalitarian path” Italy, Germany.
Finally, a different picture was observed in countries that applied the totalitarian direction, such as Germany and Italy. They were trying to solve not so much the problem of overcoming the crisis as they were pursuing the more distant goal of an armed redivision of the world. More precisely, the ultimate task of redividing the world determined the path and methods of overcoming the crisis.
The main feature of anti-crisis policy thus becomes the total militarization of the national economy. For this purpose, fascist states widely used direct methods of intervention, along with indirect ones. Moreover, the latter, as a rule, became predominant as government intervention developed. Suffice it to say that in these countries there is a constant increase in the public sector in the economy. In addition to the enterprises of the military industry itself, the nationalization of raw materials industries, the fuel and energy base, transport, etc. took place. Along with this, forced cartelization was carried out (the entry of individual enterprises into large monopoly associations closely associated with the state). On this basis, the share of state orders constantly increased, and elements of directive economic planning developed.
As a result of this policy, within a year unemployment disappeared in Germany, from which countries that had chosen other models of state-monopoly capitalism continued to suffer. Economic growth rates, especially in heavy industries, have risen sharply.
The debate before World War II about what was more important, greater speed or better maneuverability*, was finally resolved in favor of greater speed. Combat experience has convincingly shown that speed is ultimately the determining factor for victory in air combat. The pilot of a more maneuverable but slower aircraft was simply forced to defend himself, ceding the initiative to the enemy. However, when conducting an air battle, such a fighter, having an advantage in horizontal and vertical maneuverability, will be able to decide the outcome of the battle in its favor by taking an advantageous firing position.
Messerschmitt Bf.109
Before the war for a long time It was believed that in order to increase maneuverability the aircraft must be unstable; the insufficient stability of the I-16 aircraft cost the lives of more than one pilot. Having studied German aircraft before the war, the report of the Air Force Research Institute noted:
“...all German aircraft differ sharply from domestic ones in their large margins of stability, which also significantly increases flight safety, aircraft survivability and simplifies piloting techniques and mastery by low-skilled combat pilots.”
By the way, the difference between German aircraft and the latest domestic ones, which were tested almost simultaneously at the Air Force Research Institute, was so striking that it forced the head of the institute, Major General A.I. Filin, to draw the attention of I.V. Stalin to this. The consequences were dramatic for Filin: he was arrested on May 23, 1941.
(Source 5 Alexander Pavlov) As is known, aircraft maneuverability depends primarily on two quantities. The first - specific load on engine power - determines the vertical maneuverability of the machine; the second is the specific load on the wing - horizontal. Let's look at these indicators for the Bf 109 in more detail (see table).
* Notes to the table: 1. Bf 109G-6/U2 with the GM-1 system, the weight of which when filled was 160 kg plus 13 kg of additional engine oil.
2.Bf 109G-4/U5 with the MW-50 system, the weight of which when loaded was 120 kg.
The 3.Bf 109G-10/U4 was armed with one 30 mm MK-108 cannon and two 13 mm MG-131 machine guns, as well as the MW-50 system.
Theoretically, the 199th, compared to its main opponents, had better vertical maneuverability throughout the Second World War. But in practice this was not always true. Much in combat depended on the experience and abilities of the pilot.
Eric Brown (an Englishman who tested the Bf 109G-6/U2/R3/R6 in 1944 at Farnborough) recalled: “We conducted comparative tests of the captured Bf 109G-6 with Spitfire fighters of the LF.IX, XV and XIV series, as well as with the P-51C Mustang. In terms of climb rate, the Gustav was superior to all these aircraft at all altitude levels.”
D. A. Alekseev, who fought on the Lavochkin in 1944, compares the Soviet machine with the main enemy at that time - the Bf 109G-6. “In terms of climb rate, the La-5FN was superior to the Messerschmitt. If the “mess” tried to move up from us, we caught up. And the steeper the Messer went upward, the easier it was to catch up with it.
In terms of horizontal speed, the La-5FN was slightly faster than the Messer, and the advantage of the La in speed over the Fokker was even greater. In horizontal flight, neither the Messer nor the Fokker could escape the La-5FN. If the German pilots did not have the opportunity to dive, then we, sooner or later, caught up with them.
It must be said that the Germans constantly improved their fighters. The Germans had a modification of the Messer, which even surpassed the La-5FN in speed. It also appeared towards the end of the war, around the end of 1944. I never met these “Messers,” but Lobanov did. I remember well how Lobanov was very surprised that he came across such “Messers” who got away from his La-5FN in pitching, but he could not catch up with them.”
Only at the final stage of the war, from the autumn of 1944 to May 1945, did the leadership gradually pass to allied aviation. Since appearing on Western Front such vehicles as the P-51D and P-47D, the “classic” dive attack exit became quite problematic for the Bf 109G.
P-51 Mustang
American fighters caught up with him and shot him down on the way out. On the “hill” they also left no chance for the “one hundred and ninth”. The newest Bf 109K-4 could break away from them both in a dive and vertically, but the quantitative superiority of the Americans and their tactical techniques negated these advantages of the German fighter.
On Eastern Front the situation was somewhat different. More than half of the Bf 109G-6 and G-14 delivered to air units since 1944 were equipped with the MW50 engine boost system.
MESSERSCHMITT Bf109G-14
The injection of a water-methanol mixture significantly increased the power supply of the vehicle at altitudes up to approximately 6500 meters. The increase in horizontal speed and during a dive was very significant. F. de Joffre remembers.
“On March 20, 1945 (...) six of our Yak-3s were attacked by twelve Messers, including six Me-109/G.
Yak-3
They were piloted exclusively experienced pilots. The Germans’ maneuvers were distinguished by such precision, as if they were on a training exercise. Messerschmitt-109/G, thanks to a special fuel mixture enrichment system, calmly enters a steep dive, which pilots call “deadly.” Here they break away from the rest of the “Messers”, and we don’t have time to open fire before they unexpectedly attack us from behind. Bleton is forced to bail out."
The main problem with using the MW50 was that the system could not operate during the entire flight.
jumo 213 engine using MW-50 system
The injection could be used for a maximum of ten minutes, then the engine overheated and threatened to jam. Next, a five-minute break was required, after which the system could be restarted. These ten minutes were usually enough to carry out two or three dive attacks, but if the Bf 109 was drawn into a maneuverable battle at low altitudes, then it could well lose.
Hauptmann Hans-Werner Lerche, who tested the captured La-5FN in Rechlin in September 1944, wrote in the report. “Due to the merits of its engine, the La-5FN was better suited for low-altitude combat. Its maximum ground speed is only slightly less than that of the FW190A-8 and Bf 109 in afterburner. Overclocking characteristics are comparable. The La-5FN is inferior to the Bf 109 and MW50 in speed and climb rate at all altitudes. The efficiency of the La-5FN’s ailerons is higher than that of the One Hundred and Ninth, and the turn time at the ground is shorter.”
In this regard, let's consider horizontal maneuverability. As I already said, horizontal maneuverability depends, first of all, on the specific load on the aircraft wing. And the smaller this value is for a fighter, the faster it can perform turns, rolls and other aerobatic maneuvers in the horizontal plane. But this is only in theory; in practice, things were often not so simple. During the Spanish Civil War, Bf 109B-1 met in the air with I-16 type 10.
I-16 type 10
The specific wing load of the German fighter was slightly lower than that of the Soviet one, but the battle on turns, as a rule, was won by the republican pilot.
The problem for the “German” was that after one or two turns in one direction, the pilot “shifted” his plane to the other side and here the “one hundred and nineth” lost. The smaller I-16, which literally “walked” behind the control stick, had a higher roll rate and therefore performed this maneuver more energetically compared to the more inert Bf 109B. As a result, the German fighter lost precious fractions of seconds, and the time it took to complete the maneuver became slightly longer.
The battles on turns during the so-called “Battle of England” turned out somewhat differently. Here the enemy of the Bf 109E was the more maneuverable Spitfire. Its specific wing load was significantly lower than that of the Messerschmitt.
Spitfire
Lieutenant Max-Helmut Ostermann, who later became commander of 7./JG54, an expert with 102 victories, recalled: The Spitfires proved to be surprisingly maneuverable aircraft. Their demonstration of aerial acrobatics - loops, rolls, shooting on turns - all this could not help but delight.”
And here's what I wrote English historian Mike Speake in general remarks on aircraft performance.
“The ability to turn depends on two factors - the specific wing load and the speed of the aircraft. If two fighters are flying at the same speed, then the fighter with less wing load will turn around its opponent. However, if it flies significantly faster, then the opposite often happens.” It was the second part of this conclusion that German pilots used in battles with the British. To reduce the speed on a turn, the Germans extended the flaps by 30°, placing them in the take-off position, and with a further decrease in speed, the slats were automatically extended.
The final conclusion of the British about the maneuverability of the Bf 109E can be taken from the report on testing the captured vehicle in Letno- research center to Farnborough:
“In terms of maneuverability, the pilots noted a small difference between the Emil and the Spitfire Mk.I and Mk.II at altitudes of 3500-5000 m - one is slightly better in one mode, the other in “its own” maneuver. Above 6100 meters the Bf 109E was slightly better. The Hurricane had higher drag, which put it behind the Spitfire and Bf 109 in acceleration."
Hurricane
In 1941, new aircraft of the Bf109 F modification appeared at the front. And although their wing area was somewhat smaller and their take-off weight greater than that of their predecessors, they became faster and more maneuverable due to the use of a new, aerodynamically improved wing . The turn time was reduced, and with the flaps extended, it was possible to “win back” one more second, which was confirmed by tests of captured “one hundred and nineths” at the Research Institute of the Red Army Air Force. However, the German pilots tried not to get involved in battles on turns, since this meant they had to reduce their speed and, as a result, lose the initiative.
Later versions of the Bf 109 produced after 1943 noticeably “gained weight” and actually slightly deteriorated horizontal maneuverability. This was due to the fact that as a result of massive raids by American bombers on German territory, the Germans gave priority to air defense tasks. But in the fight against heavy bombers, horizontal maneuverability is not so important. Therefore, they relied on strengthening the on-board weapons, which entailed an increase in the take-off weight of the fighter.
The only exception was the Bf 109 G-14, which was the lightest and most maneuverable aircraft of the “G” modification. Most of these vehicles were delivered to the Eastern Front, where maneuver battles were fought much more often. And those that got to the west, as a rule, were used to fight enemy escort fighters.
He recalls I.I. Kozhemyako, who fought a duel on a Yak-1B with a Bf 109G-14.
“It turned out like this: as soon as we took off with the attack aircraft, we didn’t even approach the front line, and the “Messers” fell on us. I was the leader of the “top” pair. We saw the Germans from afar, my commander Sokolov managed to give me the command: “Ivan! A pair of "skinny" ones on top! Fight back!” It was then that my couple got along with this pair of “one hundred and nine.” The Germans started a maneuverable battle, the Germans turned out to be persistent. During the battle, both I and the leader of the German pair broke away from our wingmen. The two of us spun for about twenty minutes. They converged - they diverged, they converged - they diverged! Nobody wanted to give in! Whatever I did to get behind the Germans - I literally put the Yak on its wing, it didn’t work! While we were spinning, we lost speed to a minimum, and as soon as none of us went into a tailspin?.. Then we’ll disperse, make a larger circle, catch our breath, and again - full throttle, turn as steeply as possible!
It all ended with the fact that at the exit from the bend, we stood up “wing to wing” and were flying in one direction. The German looks at me, I look at the German. The situation is stalemate. I examined the German pilot in every detail: a young guy was sitting in the cockpit, wearing a mesh helmet. (I remember I was also jealous of him: “The bastard is lucky!..”, because sweat was flowing from under my headset.)
What to do in such a situation is completely unclear. If one of us tries to take a turn, he won’t have time to get up and the enemy will shoot us. He’ll try to go vertical, and he’ll shoot him there, only he’ll have to raise his nose. While we were spinning, I had only one thought - to shoot down this bastard, but then I “came to my senses” and realized that my affairs were “not very good.” Firstly, it turns out that the German tied me up in battle and tore me away from the attack aircraft’s cover. God forbid, while I was hanging around with him, the stormtroopers lost someone - I should have a “pale appearance and bow legs.”
Although my commander gave me the command for this battle, it turns out that, having gotten involved in a protracted battle, I chased after the “downed” one, and neglected to fulfill the main combat mission - covering the “silts”. Then explain why you couldn’t break away from the German, prove that you are not a camel. Secondly, if another “Messer” appears now, it will be the end of me, I’m tied. But, apparently, the German had the same thoughts, at least about the appearance of the second “Yak” he definitely had.
I see the German slowly moving away to the side. I pretend not to notice. He is on the wing and in a sharp dive, I am “full throttle” and away from him in the opposite direction! Well, to hell with you, you’re so skillful.”
To summarize, I. I. Kozhemyako said that the Messer was excellent as a maneuverable combat fighter. If there was a fighter then created specifically for maneuverable combat, it was the Messer! High-speed, highly maneuverable (especially on the vertical), highly dynamic. I don’t know about everything else, but if we take into account only speed and maneuverability, the Messer was almost ideal for a “dumping ground.” Another thing is that the majority of German pilots openly did not like this type of combat, and I still cannot understand why?
I don’t know what “didn’t allow” the Germans, but not the performance characteristics of the Messer. On Kursk Bulge a couple of times they pulled us into such “carousels”, our heads almost flew off from spinning, so the “Messers” were spinning around us.
To be honest, throughout the war I dreamed of fighting in just such a fighter - fast and superior to everyone in the vertical. But it didn’t work out.”
And based on the memories of other World War II veterans, we can conclude that the Bf 109G was not at all suited to the role of a “flying log.” For example, the excellent horizontal maneuverability of the Bf 109G-14 was demonstrated by E. Hartmann in a battle with Mustangs at the end of June 1944, when he single-handedly shot down three fighters, and then managed to fight off eight P-51Ds, which failed even get into his car.
Dive. Some historians claim that the Bf109 is extremely difficult to control in a dive, the rudders are not effective, the plane “sucks in”, and the planes cannot withstand the loads. They probably draw these conclusions based on the conclusions of pilots who tested captured samples. As an example, I will give several such statements.
In April 1942, the future colonel and commander of the 9th IAD, ace with the 59th air victories A.I. Pokryshkin arrived in Novocherkassk, with a group of pilots mastering the captured Bf109 E-4/N. According to him, two Slovak pilots flew over in Messerschmitts and surrendered. Perhaps Alexander Ivanovich got something wrong with the dates, since the Slovak fighter pilots at that time were still in Denmark, at the Karup Grove airfield, where they studied the Bf 109E. And on the eastern front, judging by the documents of the 52nd Fighter Squadron, they appeared on July 1, 1942 as part of 13.(Slovak.)/JG52. But, let's return to the memories.
Messerschmitt Bf-109E Emil
“In just a few days in the zone, I practiced simple and complex aerobatics and began to confidently control the Messerschmitt.” We must pay tribute - the plane was good. Had a number positive qualities compared to our fighters. In particular, the Me-109 had an excellent radio station, the front glass was armored, and the canopy was removable. We have only dreamed about this so far. But the Me-109 also had serious shortcomings. The diving qualities are worse than those of the MiG. I knew about this back at the front, when during reconnaissance I had to break away from groups of Messerschmitts attacking me in a steep dive.”
Another pilot, Englishman Eric Brown, who tested the Bf 109G-6/U2/R3/R6 in 1944 in Farnborough (Great Britain), speaks about the dive characteristics.
Bf 109G-6/U2/R3/R6
"With a relatively small cruising speed, it was only 386 km/h, driving the Gustav was simply wonderful. However, as speed increased, the situation quickly changed. When diving at 644 km/h and experiencing high-speed pressure, the controls behaved as if they were frozen. Personally, I achieved a speed of 708 km/h during a dive from an altitude of 3000 m, and it seemed that the controls were simply blocked.”
And here is another statement, this time from the book “Fighter Aviation Tactics” published in the USSR in 1943: “The draft of the aircraft when recovering from a dive is large for the Me-109 fighter. A steep dive with a low altitude recovery is difficult for the Me-109 fighter. Changing direction during a dive and generally during an attack at high speed is also difficult for the Me-109 fighter.”
Now let's turn to the memoirs of other pilots. The pilot of the Normandy squadron, Francois de Joffre, an ace with 11 victories, recalls.
“The sun hits my eyes so hard that I have to make incredible efforts not to lose sight of Schall. He, like me, loves a crazy race. I line up next to him. Wing to wing we continue patrolling. Everything, it seemed, was going to end without any incident, when suddenly two Messerschmitts fell on us from above. We're caught off guard. Like crazy, I take the pen on myself. The car shudders terribly and rears up, but fortunately does not go into a tailspin. The Fritz's line passes 50 meters from me. If I had been a quarter of a second late with the maneuver, the German would have sent me straight to that world from which there is no return.
An air battle begins. (...) I have an advantage in maneuverability. The enemy senses this. He understands that now I am the master of the situation. Four thousand meters... Three thousand meters... We are rapidly rushing towards the ground... So much the better! The advantage of the “yak” must have an effect. I clench my teeth tighter. Suddenly, the “Messer”, all white, except for the ominous, black cross and the disgusting, spider-like swastika, emerges from its dive and flies off at low level to Goldap.
I try to keep up and, enraged with rage, I pursue him, squeezing out everything he can give from the “yak.” The arrow shows the speed of 700 or 750 kilometers per hour. I increase the dive angle and, when it reaches about 80 degrees, I suddenly remember Bertrand, who crashed at Alytus, the victim of a colossal load that destroyed the wing.
Instinctively, I take the handle. It seems to me that it is presented hard, even too hard. I pull again, carefully so as not to damage anything, and little by little I select it. Movements regain their former confidence. The nose of the plane faces the horizon. The speed drops somewhat. How timely it all is! I can hardly understand anything anymore. When, after a split second, consciousness fully returns to me, I see that the enemy fighter is rushing close to the ground, as if playing leapfrog with the white treetops.”
Now I think everyone understands what a “steep dive with a low-altitude exit” as performed by the Bf 109 is. As for A.I. Pokryshkin, he is right in his conclusion. The MiG-3, indeed, accelerated faster in a dive, but for different reasons. Firstly, it had more advanced aerodynamics, the wing and horizontal tail had a smaller relative profile thickness compared to the wing and tail of the Bf 109. And, as you know, it is the wing that creates the maximum drag of the aircraft in the air (about 50%). Secondly, the power of a fighter engine plays an equally important role. For the Mig, at low altitudes, it was approximately equal to or slightly higher than for the Messerschmitt. And thirdly, the MiG was heavier than the Bf 109E by almost 700 kilograms, and the Bf 109F by more than 600. In general, the slight advantage in each of the factors mentioned was reflected in the higher dive speed of the Soviet fighter.
Former pilot of the 41st GIAP, reserve colonel D. A. Alekseev, who fought on La-5 and La-7 fighters, recalls: “German fighter planes were strong. Fast, maneuverable, durable, with very strong weapons (especially the Fokker).
La-5F
In a dive they caught up with the La-5, and with a dive they broke away from us. Flip and dive, that's all we saw. By and large, in a dive, neither the Messer nor the Fokker even caught up with the La-7.”
However, D. A. Alekseev knew how to shoot down a Bf 109 going into a dive. But this “trick” could only be performed by an experienced pilot. “Although, even in a dive there is a chance to catch a German. The German is in a dive, you are behind him, and here you need to act correctly. Give full throttle and tighten the propeller as much as possible for a few seconds. In just these few seconds, “Lavochkin” literally makes a breakthrough. During this “jerk” it was quite possible to get close to the German at firing range. So they got close and shot down. But if you missed this moment, then it’s really all about catching up.”
Let's return to the Bf 109G-6, which E. Brown tested.
Messerschmitt Bf.109G Gustav
There is also one “small” nuance here. This aircraft was equipped with a GM1 engine boost system; the 115-liter tank of this system was located behind the pilot's cabin. It is known for certain that the British failed to fill the GM1 with the appropriate mixture and simply poured gasoline into its tank. It is not surprising that with such an additional load total mass 160 kg is more difficult to bring a fighter out of a dive.
As for the figure given by the pilot of 708 km/h, then, in my opinion, either it is greatly underestimated, or he dived at a low angle. The maximum dive speed developed by any modification of the Bf 109 was significantly higher.
For example, from January to March 1943, at the Luftwaffe research center in Travemünde, the Bf 109F-2 was tested for maximum dive speed with various heights. In this case, the following results were obtained for the true (not instrumented) speed:
From the memoirs of German and English pilots it is clear that in battle sometimes higher dive speeds were achieved.
Without a doubt, the Bf109 accelerated perfectly in a dive and came out of it easily. At least none of the Luftwaffe veterans I know spoke negatively about the Messer’s dive. The pilot was greatly assisted in recovering from a steep dive by an in-flight adjustable stabilizer, which was used instead of a trimmer and was adjusted with a special steering wheel to an angle of attack from +3° to -8°.
Eric Brown recalled: “If the stabilizer is installed on level flight, it was necessary to apply great force to the control stick to bring the plane out of a dive at a speed of 644 km/h. If it was set to dive, recovery was somewhat difficult unless the helm was turned back. Otherwise, there will be excessive load on the handle.”
In addition, on all steering surfaces of the Messerschmitt there were flötners - plates bent on the ground, which made it possible to remove part of the load transmitted from the rudders to the handle and pedals. On machines of the “F” and “G” series, the flatners were increased in area due to increased speeds and loads. And on the modifications Bf 109G-14/AS, Bf 109G-10 and Bf109K-4, the flatners, in general, became double.
Luftwaffe technical personnel were very attentive to the flätner installation procedure. Before each combat flight, all fighters underwent careful adjustment using a special protractor. Perhaps the Allies, who tested captured German samples, simply did not pay attention to this point. And if the flätner was incorrectly adjusted, the loads transmitted to the controls could indeed increase several times.
To be fair, it should be noted that on the Eastern Front the battles took place at altitudes of 1000, up to 1500 meters, there was nowhere to go with a dive...
In mid-1943, at the Air Force Research Institute Joint tests of Soviet and German aircraft were carried out. Thus, in August they tried to compare the newest Yak-9D and La-5FN in training air battles with the Bf 109G-2 and FW 190A-4.
The emphasis was placed on flight and combat qualities, in particular, on the maneuverability of fighters. Seven pilots at once, moving from cockpit to cockpit, conducted training battles, first in the horizontal and then in the vertical planes. The advantages in throttle response were determined by the acceleration of vehicles from a speed of 450 km/h to maximum, and a free air battle began with a meeting of fighters during frontal attacks.
After the “battle” with the “three-point” “Messer” (piloted by Captain Kuvshinov), test pilot Senior Lieutenant Maslyakov wrote: “The La-5FN aircraft up to an altitude of 5000 m had an advantage over the Bf 109G-2 and could conduct an offensive battle in both horizontal, and in vertical planes. During turns, our fighter entered the enemy’s tail after 4-8 turns. On a vertical maneuver up to 3000 m, the Lavochkin had a clear advantage: it gained an “extra” 50-100 m during a combat turn and hill. From 3000 m this advantage decreased and at an altitude of 5000 m the planes became the same. When climbing to 6000 m, the La-5FN was slightly behind.
During the dive, the Lavochkin also lagged behind the Messerschmitt, but when the aircraft were withdrawn, it caught up with it again, due to its smaller radius of curvature. This point must be used in air combat. We must strive to fight a German fighter at altitudes up to 5000 m, using a combined maneuver in the horizontal and vertical planes.”
It turned out to be more difficult to “fight” with German fighters the Yak-9D aircraft. The relatively large supply of fuel had a negative impact on the Yak’s maneuverability, especially vertical. Therefore, their pilots were recommended to conduct battles on turns.
Combat pilots were given recommendations on the preferred tactics of combat with one or another enemy aircraft, taking into account the reservation scheme used by the Germans. The conclusion signed by the head of the institute’s department, General Shishkin, stated: “The serial Yak-9 and La-5 aircraft, in terms of their combat and flight-tactical data, up to an altitude of 3500-5000 m, are superior to the latest modifications of German fighters (Bf 109G-2 and FW 190A-4) and with proper operation of aircraft in the air, our pilots can successfully fight enemy aircraft.”
Below is a table of characteristics of Soviet and German fighters based on testing materials at the Air Force Research Institute. (For domestic cars data from prototypes are given).
*Using boost mode
Real fights on Soviet-German front were noticeably different from the “staged” ones at the testing institute. German pilots did not engage in maneuver battles in either the vertical or horizontal plane. Their fighters tried to shoot down a Soviet plane with a surprise attack, and then went into the clouds or into their territory. Stormtroopers also unexpectedly attacked our ground troops. It was rarely possible to intercept both of them. Special tests conducted at the Air Force Research Institute were aimed at developing techniques and methods for combating Focke-Wulf attack aircraft. They took part in captured FW 190A-8 No. 682011 and the “lightweight” FW 190A-8 No. 58096764, which were intercepted by the most modern fighters of the Red Army Air Force: the Yak-3. Yak-9U and La-7.
The “battles” showed that in order to successfully combat low-flying German aircraft, it is necessary to develop new tactics. After all, most often the Focke-Wulfs approached at low altitudes and left at low altitude. maximum speeds. Under these conditions, it turned out to be difficult to detect the attack in a timely manner, and pursuit became more difficult, since the gray matte paint hid the German vehicle against the background of the terrain. In addition, the FW 190 pilots turned on the engine boost device at low altitudes. Testers determined that in this case, the Focke-Wulfs reached a speed of 582 km/h near the ground, i.e. neither the Yak-3 (the aircraft available at the Air Force Research Institute reached a speed of 567 km/h) nor the Yak-3 could catch up with them. 9U (575 km/h). Only the La-7 accelerated to 612 km/h in afterburner, but the speed reserve was insufficient to quickly reduce the distance between the two aircraft to aimed fire range. Based on the test results, the institute’s management issued recommendations: it is necessary to echelon our fighters on patrols at altitudes. In this case, the task of the upper tier pilots would be to disrupt the bombing, as well as to attack the covering fighters accompanying the attack aircraft, and the attack aircraft themselves would most likely be able to intercept the lower patrol vehicles, which had the opportunity to accelerate in a shallow dive.
Special mention should be made of the FW-190's armor protection. The appearance of the FW 190A-5 modification meant that German command considered the Focke-Wulf as the most promising attack aircraft. Indeed, the already significant armor protection (its weight on the FW 190A-4 reached 110 kg) was strengthened by 16 additional plates with a total weight of 200 kg, mounted in lower parts center section and engine. The removal of two Oerlikon wing cannons reduced the weight of a second salvo to 2.85 kg (for the FW 190A-4 it was 4.93 kg, for the La-5FN 1.76 kg), but made it possible to partially compensate for the increase in take-off weight and had a beneficial effect on aerobatic performance FW 190 - thanks to the forward shift of the centering, the stability of the fighter has increased. The altitude gain for a combat turn increased by 100 m, and the turn time was reduced by about a second. The plane accelerated to 582 km/h at 5000 m and gained this altitude in 12 minutes. Soviet engineers suggested that the real flight data of the FW190A-5 was higher, since the automatic mixture quality control functioned abnormally and there was heavy smoking from the engine even when operating on the ground.
Messerschmitt Bf109
At the end of the war, German aviation, although it posed a certain danger, did not conduct active combat operations. In conditions of complete air supremacy of Allied aviation, no most advanced aircraft could change the nature of the war. German fighters They only defended themselves in extremely unfavorable conditions. In addition, there was practically no one to fly them, since the entire flower of German fighter aviation died in fierce battles on the Eastern Front.
* - The maneuverability of the aircraft in the horizontal plane is described by the turn time, i.e. full reversal time. The smaller the specific load on the wing, the smaller the turning radius, i.e. an aircraft with a larger wing and lower flight weight (having a greater lift force, which here will be equal to the centrifugal force), will be able to perform a steeper turn. Obviously, an increase in lift with a simultaneous decrease in speed can occur when the wing mechanization is released (flaps are extended and the speed of automatic slats is reduced), however, exiting a turn at a lower speed is fraught with loss of initiative in combat.
Twice Hero Soviet Union Grigory Rechkalov next to the aircobra
Secondly, in order to perform a turn, the pilot must first bank the plane. The roll rate depends on the lateral stability of the aircraft, the effectiveness of the ailerons, and the moment of inertia, which is smaller (M=L m) the smaller the wing span and its mass. Hence, maneuverability will be worse for an aircraft with two engines on the wing, filled with tanks in the wing consoles or weapons mounted on the wing.
The maneuverability of an aircraft in the vertical plane is described by its rate of climb and depends, first of all, on the specific power load (the ratio of the mass of the aircraft to the power of its power plant and in other words expresses the number of kg of weight that one horsepower “carries”) and obviously at lower values the aircraft has a higher rate of climb. Obviously, the rate of climb also depends on the ratio of the flight mass to the total aerodynamic drag.
Sources
How to compare planes of World War II. /TO. Kosminkov, "Ace" No. 2,3 1991/
- Comparison of World War II fighters. /“Wings of the Motherland” No. 5 1991 Viktor Bakursky/
- Race for the ghost of speed. Fallen from the nest. /“Wings of the Motherland” No. 12 1993 Viktor Bakursky/
- German trace in history domestic aviation. /Sobolev D.A., Khazanov D.B./
- Three myths about the "Messer" /Alexander Pavlov "AviAMaster" 8-2005./
Although World War I saw the introduction of tanks, World War II revealed the true fury of these mechanical monsters. During the fighting they played important role as among countries anti-Hitler coalition, and among the Axis powers. Both warring sides created a significant number of tanks. Below are ten outstanding tanks of World War II - the most powerful vehicles of this period ever built.
10. M4 Sherman (USA)
The second most popular tank of the Second World War. Produced in the USA and some other Western countries of the anti-Hitler coalition mainly due to American program Lend-Lease, which provided military support foreign allied powers. The Sherman medium tank had a standard 75 mm gun with 90 rounds of ammunition and was equipped with relatively thin frontal armor (51 mm) compared to other vehicles of the period.
Developed in 1941, the tank was named after famous general Civil War in the USA - William T. Sherman. The vehicle took part in numerous battles and campaigns from 1942 to 1945. The relative lack of firepower was compensated by its enormous quantity: about 50 thousand Shermans were produced during the Second World War.
9. "Sherman-Firefly" (UK)
Sherman Firefly - British version M4 Sherman tank, which was equipped with a devastating 17-pounder anti-tank gun, more powerful than the original 75 mm Sherman gun. The 17 pounder was destructive enough to damage any known tank of the time. The Sherman Firefly was one of those tanks that terrified the Axis countries and was characterized as one of the deadliest fighting vehicles of the Second World War. In total, more than 2,000 units were produced.
PzKpfw V "Panther" - medium german tank, which appeared on the battlefield in 1943 and remained until the end of the war. A total of 6,334 units were created. The tank reached speeds of up to 55 km/h, had strong 80 mm armor and was armed with a 75 mm gun with ammunition from 79 to 82 high-explosive fragmentation and armor-piercing shells. The T-V was powerful enough to damage any enemy vehicle at that time. It was technically superior to the Tiger and T-IV tanks.
And although the T-V Panther was later surpassed by numerous Soviet T-34s, it remained a serious opponent until the end of the war.
5. “Comet” IA 34 (UK)
One of Britain's most powerful fighting vehicles and probably the best that the country used in World War II. The tank was armed with a powerful 77-mm cannon, which was a shortened version of the 17-pounder gun. Thick armor reached 101 millimeters. However, the Comet did not have a significant impact on the course of the War due to its late introduction to the battlefield - around 1944, when the Germans were retreating.
But be that as it may, during its short service life this military vehicle has shown its effectiveness and reliability.
4. "Tiger I" (Germany)
Tiger I is a German heavy tank developed in 1942. It had a powerful 88-mm gun with 92–120 rounds of ammunition. It was successfully used against both air and ground targets. Complete German name This beast sounds like a Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf.E, but the Allies simply called this vehicle “Tiger”.
It accelerated to 38 km/h and had non-tilted armor with a thickness of 25 to 125 mm. When it was created in 1942, it suffered from some technical problems, but was soon freed from them, turning into a ruthless mechanical hunter by 1943.
The Tiger was a formidable machine, which forced the Allies to develop more advanced tanks. It symbolized the strength and power of the Nazi war machine, and until mid-war, no Allied tank was strong enough or powerful enough to withstand the Tiger in a direct confrontation. However, during the final stages of World War II, the Tiger's dominance was often challenged by the better armed Sherman Fireflies and Soviet IS-2 tanks.
3. IS-2 “Joseph Stalin” (Soviet Union)
The IS-2 tank belonged to a whole family of heavy tanks of the Joseph Stalin type. It had characteristic sloped armor with a thickness of 120 mm and a large 122 mm gun. The frontal armor was impenetrable to German 88 mm anti-tank gun shells at a distance of more than 1 kilometer. Its production began in 1944, a total of 2,252 tanks of the IS family were built, about half of which were modifications of the IS-2.
During the Battle of Berlin, IS-2 tanks destroyed entire German buildings with high-explosive fragmentation shells. It was a real battering ram of the Red Army as it advanced towards the heart of Berlin.
2. M26 “Pershing” (USA)
The United States created a heavy tank that belatedly took part in World War II. It was developed in 1944, the total number of tanks produced was 2,212 units. "Pershing" was more complex model in comparison with the Sherman, it had a lower profile and larger tracks, which provided the vehicle with better stability.
The main gun had a caliber of 90 millimeters (70 shells were attached to it), powerful enough to penetrate the Tiger's armor. "Pershing" had the strength and power to frontally attack those vehicles that the Germans or Japanese could use. But only 20 tanks took part in combat operations in Europe and very few were sent to Okinawa. After the end of World War II, Pershings took part in Korean War and continued to be used in American troops. The M26 Pershing could have been a game changer if it had been deployed to the battlefield sooner.
1. "Jagdpanther" (Germany)
The Jagdpanther was one of the most powerful tank destroyers of World War II. It was based on the Panther chassis, entered service in 1943, and served until 1945. It was armed with an 88 mm cannon with 57 rounds and had 100 mm frontal armor. The gun maintained accuracy at a distance of up to three kilometers and had a muzzle velocity of over 1000 m/s.
Only 415 tanks were built during the war. The Jagdpanthers received their baptism of fire on July 30, 1944 near Saint Martin De Bois, France, where they destroyed eleven Churchill tanks within two minutes. Technical excellence and cutting edge firepower did not have much impact on the course of the war due to the late introduction of these monsters.
|
The Great Patriotic War |
The Second World War |
|
|
Deadlines |
||
|
Beginning of the war |
As part of the Second World War, the Second World War coincides with it in time from June 22, 1941 to May 9, 1945 (for the USSR). The Great Patriotic War is part The Second World War as a global military conflict and at the same time represents independent and a military conflict of its own importance, specifically for the territory of the USSR. |
World War II for Western states begins earlier than for the USSR (September 1, 1939 - the invasion of German troops into Polish territory) and ends later (September 2, 1945 - the surrender of Japan). |
|
Theater of war |
The Second World War includes not only actions on the territories of the USSR proper, but also on the occupied lands of the Eastern and Central Europe(Poland, Austria, Czechoslovakia), as well as in the territories of allied countries of Germany and Germany itself. |
The events of WWII also unfolded on the fields of Western, Northern and Southern Europe(for example France, Italy, etc.), North Africa(for example, modern Tunisia, Libya), Eastern and South-East Asia(for example, China, Indonesia), etc. |
|
End of the war |
On May 8, 1945, the act of unconditional surrender of Germany was signed. Germany's allies left the war even earlier (Italy, Finland, Hungary, etc.). This was the end of the Great Patriotic War for the USSR. May 9, 1945 was declared Victory Day of the Soviet Union over Germany. |
On Yalta Conference in February 1945, the USSR committed itself to entering the war with Japan no later than 3 months after the end of the war with Hitler. Accordingly, on August 8, the USSR attacked Japan. The war continued until September 2, 1945, when the act of surrender of Japan was signed. This event ended the Second world war. |
By the way, at the Unified State Examination in history in 2016, many graduates were “caught” for not understanding the difference between WWII and WWII. Igor Anatolyevich Artasov writes about this in the Methodological Recommendations for Teachers. In particular, he gives the following example real task from the 2016 exam:
Example 14. What judgments about this brand are true? Choose two judgments from five proposed.
1) The event to which the stamp is dedicated took place during Great Patriotic War.
2) A contemporary of the event to which the stamp is dedicated was M. V. Frunze
3) This stamp was issued during the period when B. N. Yeltsin was the President of Russia.
4) The event to which the stamp is dedicated took place during Second World War.
5) One of the participants in the event to which the stamp is dedicated was F. Roosevelt.
Results of the Second World War. Conclusions of the defeated Specialists German Military
COMPARATIVE TABLE OF POPULATION (IN THOUSANDS) OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES PARTICIPATED IN THE SECOND WORLD WAR (EXCEPT GERMANY AND THE SOVIET UNION)
}