Ju87G

‘Because of the cannons, the Ju 87’s maneuverability is disadvantageously reduced, and its landing speed is increased considerably. But now armament potency is a prime consideration over flying performance,’ Hans-Ulrich Rudel, the most renowned Stuka pilot of all

The German air ministry approved the construction of an upgraded Junkers Ju 87D-5 Stuka dive-bomber in late 1942 as part of its efforts to retaliate against the growing number of Soviet tanks. The plane was appropriately equipped with two underwing pods that held a 37 mm BK 3.7 cm antiaircraft cannon, which has been around since 1933. There was a Ju 87G. The Luftwaffe found the sturdy, slow Ju 87 airframe to be the perfect platform for specialized, low-level “tank-killing” operations.

According to Robert Forsyth’s description in his book Ju 87D/G Stuka versus T-34 Eastern Front 1942–45, the results were largely positive, although the most famous Stuka pilot of all time, Hans-Ulrich Rudel, was cautious and wrote later:

‘The Ju 87, which is not too fast, now becomes even slower and unfavorably affected by the load of the cannon it carries. Its maneuverability is disadvantageously reduced, and its landing speed is increased considerably. But now armament potency is a prime consideration over flying performance.’

Although the installation of the cannon was acknowledged to have compromised handling and performance to some extent, it was deemed insignificant enough to prevent further operational development.

Results with the BK 3.7 cm-equipped Junkers did differ after they were introduced in numbers, and some units found the weapon was inadequate. They took the cannon down and went back to carrying bombs. However, the crews that prevailed started to develop low-level attack strategies that involved short-dive or shallow glide, when an enemy tank was approached in a straight run and fire was opened at the closest range. This method’s effectiveness was demonstrated in July 1943 when, in spite of his prior reservations, Hauptmann Rudel of StG 2 shot down 12 T-34s in a single day, with photos documenting each kill. Nevertheless, following the Ju 87G’s deployment, Rudel recalled:

‘The outlook is none too rosy. We are the object of commiseration wherever we appear, and our sympathizers do not predict a long lease of life for any of us. The heavier the Flak, the quicker my tactics develop. It is obvious that we must always carry bombs to deal with the enemy defense. But we cannot carry them on our cannon-carrying aircraft as the bomb load makes them too heavy. Besides, it is no longer possible to go into a dive with a cannon-carrying Ju 87 because the strain on the wings is too great. The practical answer is therefore to have an escort of normal Stukas.’

The evolved standard procedures were to fire at a tank’s side armor, where the BK 3.7cm was effective, or to aim for the thinner armor at the rear of a tank where the engine vents were located. Even if this could not be done, a tank could be immobilized by blowing off a track tread. The introduction of the Ju 87G compelled some Russian tank commanders to let off smoke canisters fitted to their tanks in attempts to simulate destruction, but the more experienced anti-tank pilots, such as Rudel, knew that a genuinely destroyed tank burned with flames.

A hit tank would often explode instantaneously if a fire broke out close to its store of ammunition, and so for a Ju 87 flying at an altitude of just five to ten meters above it, the situation could be, as Rudel described it, ‘uncomfortable’. He experienced personally such a scenario on two occasions in his first few days of flying the Ju 87G in combat.

A 3.7 cm cannon round was determined to be capable of penetrating 58mm of armor at a range of 100 meters at 60 degrees when operating under operational conditions.

Ju 87D/G Stuka versus T-34 Eastern Front 1942–45 is published by Osprey Publishing and is available to order here.

Photo by Bundesarchiv, Bild 101I-655-5976-04 / Grosse / CC-BY-SA 3.0 / Wikipedia