Difference of Doctrine

In Tunisia, an ungainly aircraft whose name once spelled terror passed into the twilight. Germany's famed Stuka (Junkers 87) had paid the penalty of age. The Stuka was no longer a dreaded hawk but cold turkey for British and American fliers, who had command of the air and knew what to do with it.

Convinced that the Stuka had been a nuisance rather than a menace through most of the great desert campaign, the R.A.F. reiterated one of its favorite tactical doctrines: not only the Stuka but the dive-bomber itself was obsolete.

American airmen heard this pronouncement with the respect due the most thoroughly experienced air force in the world. But they did not agree. Dive-bombing, conceived and brought to its highest perfection by the U.S. Navy, is still thoroughly alive in the U.S. forces. In the Pacific, the Douglas Dauntless (SBD) is still the most effective aerial weapon in the fleet, has done more damage than torpedo planes. Result of its showing: the Army Air Forces is now gladly taking instruction from Navy airmen on dive-bombing technique, and has taken up the SBD, which the Air Forces call the A24.

Last week there was ample evidence that the U.S. services are working with might & main to get out faster dive-bombers, thus overcome the handicap of low speed (199 m.p.h.) which has made the Stuka a sitting duck for fighter craft and flak batteries.

Some of the new Navy fighters are being produced complete with bomb racks and diving brakes* so they can be used as new-day Stukas. The Army's newest dive-bomber, announced fortnight ago, is North American's A36, a modification of the famed Mustang fighter. With Mustang speed (about 400 m.p.h.) and armament, the A36 also has diving brakes and bomb racks, can pull out of a bombing attack to meet enemy fighters on equal or superior terms.

If the R.A.F. should be proved right, planes like the A36 will still not be wasted. They are still good fighters. And the U.S. services are betting that the R.A.F. is wrong, as it was only a few years ago on heavy bombers. So there is more doing in the U.S. dive-bombing field than the conversion of fighters to double duty. To supersede the SBD, both Douglas and Curtiss are building specialized dive-bombring aircraft, with less speed than fighters, but more range, more load. And over areas where U.S. seamen or soldiers fight, dive-bombers will still come howling down.

*Brakes are installed on dive-bombers to maintain constant speed in the dive, give the pilot a steady aiming platform.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.