(cid:48) (cid:52) (cid:49) (cid:51) (cid:38) (cid:58) (cid:1) (cid:36) (cid:48) (cid:46) (cid:35) (cid:34) (cid:53) (cid:1) (cid:34) (cid:42) (cid:51) (cid:36) (cid:51) (cid:34) (cid:39) (cid:53) (cid:1) (cid:116) (cid:1) (cid:26) (cid:23) Pe-2 GUARDS UNITS OF WORLD WAR 2 Dmitriy Khazanov and Aleksander Medved © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com SERIES EDITOR: TONY HOLMES (cid:48)(cid:52)(cid:49)(cid:51)(cid:38)(cid:58)(cid:1)(cid:36)(cid:48)(cid:46)(cid:35)(cid:34)(cid:53)(cid:1)(cid:34)(cid:42)(cid:51)(cid:36)(cid:51)(cid:34)(cid:39)(cid:53)(cid:1)(cid:116)(cid:1)(cid:26)(cid:23) Pe-2 GUARDS UNITS OF WORLD WAR 2 DMITRIY KHAZANOV AND ALEKSANDER MEDVED © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE Pe-2 DEVELOPMENT 6 CHAPTER TWO GUARDS BOMBER AIR REGIMENTS 13 CHAPTER THREE GUARDS BOMBER AIR DIVISIONS 30 CHAPTER FOUR GUARDS BOMBER AIR CORPS 53 CHAPTER FIVE GUARDS RECONNAISSANCE AIR REGIMENTS 66 CHAPTER SIX GUARDS BOMBER AIR REGIMENTS OF NAVAL AIR FORCES 82 APPENDICES 90 COLOUR PLATES COMMENTARY 91 INDEX 96 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com Pe-2 DEVELOPMENT E N O R E T P A H C I n the summer of 1937 the abbreviation ‘ANT’, denoting aircraft designed by Soviet designer Andrei Nikolayevich Tupolev, was seen as a symbol of success around the world. On 20 June that year an ANT-25, piloted by V P Chkalov, landed in the USA, followed on 15 July by a second such aircraft piloted by M M Gromov, which set a world record for long-range flight. At that time another of Tupolev’s aircraft was becoming ‘widely known’ by combatants in China and Spain, the high- speed ANT-40 (SB) bomber. Everything seemed to be developing well for Tupolev and his design collective, and he could rely wholly on support from both the leadership of the Soviet aviation industry and from the state. However, in the notorious atmosphere of 1937 things were happening that were very hard to explain. In the evening of 21 October three men entered the office of chief designer Tupolev, while a fourth sat on a chair next to his secretary and suggested that she did not answer any telephone calls and did not go out. A tired Andrei Tupolev emerged into the reception room at 0300 hrs the next morning, surrounded by his ‘visitors’. After holding out for a week, on 28 October Tupolev signed a statement in which he acknowledged that he had formed an anti-Soviet group made up of his colleagues and subordinates (indicating their names), which was engaged in sabotage and subversive activity. One of the members of the ‘anti-Soviet group’, Vladimir Petlyakov, head of the Heavy Aircraft Brigade, was arrested the following day. He resisted for three days, but on 1 November, under pressure from the investigators, he acknowledged his ‘crimes’. These dramatic events became the main reason behind the emergence of the most mass-produced Soviet twin-engined aeroplane of all time, the Pe-2 dive-bomber. In the summer of 1938 a Special Technical Department (STO) for aviation was formed within the structure of the People’s Commissariat of The first series production Pe-2, which was built at Moscow Factory Internal Affairs (NKVD). V M Petlyakov’s group turned out to be the No 39. The navigator’s canopy first design collective in the STO. While still in the special prison located includes the so-called ‘turtle’ not far from the railway station at Bolshevo, in the Moscow region, section that could be lowered 6 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com Petlyakov proposed the design and manufacture of a twin-engined P e high-altitude fighter with a pressure cabin and turbo-supercharged -2 engines. Since the acronym ‘STO’ sounds similar to the figure ‘100’ in D E Russian, the aircraft was later nicknamed ‘Sotka’ (100). V E L According to performance estimates the aircraft’s ceiling was to O P be 12,500 m (41,000 ft), and its maximum speed was to be 630 km/h M (390 mph) at an altitude of 10,000 m (32,800 ft). The prototype had to EN be ready for its first flight before the end of 1939, and this tight schedule T gave rise to the introduction of an 11-hour working day without breaks for the workers in the ‘sharashka’ (an informal name given to the secret research and development laboratories established within the Soviet Gulag labour camp system). The first full-scale mock-up of the new aircraft was completed in May 1939, and the ‘Sotka’ completed its maiden flight on 22 December 1939. The ‘100, with twin M-105 engines, twin TK-2 turbo-superchargers and two pressure cabins’, was considered innovative in the Soviet Union, despite its wholly traditional layout. Two of the most modern M-105 engines (the VK-105 was a Hispano-Suiza 12Y variant built under licence by V Ya Klimov), driving VISh-42 propellers, were installed in the aircraft, and their TK-2 turbo-superchargers were incorporated into the structure of the engine nacelles. The crew of three was accommodated in two pressure cabins fed by compressed air from the turbo-superchargers that supported normal pressure up to an altitude of 10,000 metres (32,800 ft). Offensive armament included two 20 mm ShVAK cannon and two 7.62 mm ShKAS machine guns. A fixed ShKAS machine gun was also installed in the aircraft’s tailcone to protect the fighter against attacks from the rear. The option of suspending two 250- or 500-kg bombs on external bomb racks was explored for the fighter-bomber variant. On the morning of 1 May 1940 Maj Stefanovskiy demonstrated the aircraft publicly during the commemorative aviation parade in Moscow. Petlyakov and his colleagues watched the flight from the roof of their prison. Despite the defects that had come to light during the preliminary trials, the general conclusion on testing the ‘100’ aircraft was favourable. It was noted that ‘the “100” represents the most successful solution to the problems of creating an aircraft with a pressurised cabin. It is considered expedient to create a dive-bomber variant without a pressurised cabin on the basis of the “100” aircraft, with the aim of using its good aerodynamics. A trial series of aircraft must be manufactured’. The third point raised following the preliminary trials ultimately affected the fate of the ‘Sotka’, as it stated that the threat posed by high-altitude bombers was thought to be exaggerated. In reality, the few high-altitude aircraft the Germans possessed – the Junkers Ju 86P and Ju 86R and the Henschel Hs 130 – were principally used for strategic reconnaissance. At that time, right at the outbreak of World War 2, German Junkers Ju 87 dive-bombers were really making their mark, becoming a real curse for both land forces and naval fleets among Germany’s enemies. The idea of a dive-bomber was not new, but the results achieved by the Stukas in 1939-40 turned out to be revelatory for air arms across the globe. And highly effective bombing by Ju 87s was, quite rightly, a serious concern for the leadership of the USSR. 7 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com E The ability to carry a 1000-kg total bomb load was particularly N O underlined in the conclusion to the testing of the ‘100’. The change in R E the ‘Sotka’s’ role was supported by the fact that it already boasted many T P of the features of a dive-bomber. For example, it had good stability in a A H dive and was sufficiently strong enough to withstand the stresses and C strains associated with such a flight regime. On 23 June 1940 the Committee for Defence received a decree ordering the commencement of series production of the dive-bomber variant of the ‘100’ at Moscow aviation plants Nos 22 and 39. The dive-bomber (designated the PB-100) was expected to achieve a maximum speed of 535 km/h at an altitude of 4800-4900 m (330 mph at 15,750-16,000 ft). It was to have a range of 1600 km at an altitude of 5000 metres (1000 miles at 16,400 ft), having taken into account the amount of fuel consumed when taxiing, during takeoff and initial climb- out. The ceiling for the PB-100 was set at 8000 metres (26,250 ft). Petlyakov and his collective were given just 45 days for a major redesign of their high-altitude fighter, requiring the development and testing of a practically new fuselage incorporating airbrake panels and their control systems, a fundamental review of crew accommodation and a change of the engine/ propeller unit. Static tests were carried out only in relation to the new components – the fuselage with its large blisters in the tail section and the new engine nacelles. Drawings were prepared within the timescale. The promise given to Petlyakov and some of his colleagues by the dreaded chief of the NKVD, Lavrentiy Beria, that ‘if the aircraft flies, you go free’, was kept. When compared with the ‘100’ high-altitude fighter, the dive-bomber’s appearance had changed considerably. The navigator was now seated with the pilot in a shared, unpressurised cabin, and was given a defensive ShKAS machine gun in a TSS-1 turret. The gunner’s position was fitted with a hatch installation and another ShKAS machine gun. The pilot could open fire with two fixed ShKAS machine guns mounted in the nose cone. Other differences principally concerned the engine/propeller unit, the turbo-superchargers having been removed, the shape of the oil-cooler When used as a dive-bomber, the Pe-2 could carry up to four FAB-250 tunnels changed and the radiator surface area increased. bombs on external mounts. On 15 December 1940 the test pilot of Factory No 39, N Fedorov, took Extensive nose glazing gave the crew aircraft 390101 (the lead machine of the first series) aloft. The designation a good field of view Pe-2 was adopted in accordance with new rules introduced that same month, which stipulated that the first two letters of an aircraft’s designation were to be the first letters of the chief designer’s surname. With a takeoff weight of 6800 kg (14,990 lbs), the Pe-2 developed a maximum speed of 540 km/h (335 mph) at an altitude of 5000 metres (16,400 ft), which corresponded fully with the technical proposal laid out in the dive-bomber decree that had been issued to Petlyakov. An altitude of 5000 metres was reached 8 in 9.2 minutes with a 600 kg (1320- © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com lb) bomb load on internal bomb racks, and the ceiling was 8800 metres P e (28,870 ft). The aircraft was deemed to be a success thanks to its flight -2 performance characteristics, and there were no serious in-flight incidents D E during state trials at the Air Force Scientific Testing Institute. V E L In February 1941 series production of the Pe-2 commenced at aircraft O P plants Nos 124 (Kazan) and 125 (Irkutsk). It was hoped that 525 dive- M bombers could be built in the first six months of 1941, but according to EN reports from the factories only 458 machines were delivered. T The German invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941 soon put the Pe-2 to the test, and the combat experience gleaned by frontline units accelerated the process of refining the machine many times over. A series of changes to assemblies and subassemblies was hastily introduced, the first and foremost of these centring on increased weaponry in an attempt to improve the aircraft’s survivability. One of the pilot’s forward ShKAS machine guns was replaced by a 12.7 mm BK weapon, and a 12.7 mm UBT machine gun in an MB-2 turret was mounted in the hatch installation in the radio-operator/gunner’s position. By the end of 1941 another ShKAS machine gun had been fitted to the ‘Peshka’, as the Pe-2 was nicknamed in frontline service. Attached to one of two spherical mountings at the radio-operator/gunner position, the weapon could be moved from side to side. The radio-operator/gunner could fire the ShKAS into the upper hemisphere through the upper hatch by simply holding it in his hands. Other changes introduced at this time included the strengthening of armour plating around the navigator and radio-operator/gunner and the removal of vulnerable service tanks from the engine nacelles. The tanks’ design, along with the system by which they were filled with inert gas as they emptied, was also improved. Aside from the introduction of qualitative improvements, production of the ‘Peshkas’ was also increased across all the aircraft plants that had been mobilised. Consequently, the industry produced 239 Pe-2s in July 1941 and 295 the following month. Moscow was subjected to German air raids from the end of July 1941, and three newly completed Pe-2s manufactured at Factory No 22 were set on fire on the airfield at Tushino at this time. The other Moscow plant, No 39, which predominantly produced the Pe-3 nightfighter version of the Pe-2, was evacuated to Irkutsk, where it was soon merged with Factory No 125. Factory No 22 was also relocated at the same time, being moved to Kazan. It had been ‘swallowed’ by the local Factory No 124 by the end of the year. V M Petlyakov’s design bureau also moved to Kazan. Naturally, the evacuation led to a reduction in the number of dive-bombers produced. Nevertheless, in 1941 the four plants engaged in series production manufactured 1671 dive- bombers and 196 fighters, enabling many operational units along the length of the Soviet-German Front to be equipped with ‘Peshkas’. In January 1942 chief designer V M Petlyakov was killed in a flying accident. His successors elected to continue development of the ‘Peshka’ and changes were introduced, while keeping their effect on output to a minimum. Combat had quickly shown that the Pe-2’s Achilles’ heel was the ineffectiveness of the navigator’s ShKAS machine gun, which defended the upper hemisphere to the rear of the bomber. A group of designers at Factory No 22, led by L L Selyakov, found a successful compromise solution in the form of a new ‘FT’ upper pivot assembly fitted with a 12.7 mm UBT machine gun. 9 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com E In order to improve the Pe-2’s ability N O to protect itself from fighter attacks R from the upper rear area, the ShKAS E 7.62 mm machine gun in the T P navigator’s turret was replaced by a A H 12.7 mm UBT high-calibre weapon. C Unofficially, this version was designated Pe-2FT (for ‘Front Trebuet’ – front demands) Its principal advantage was that it was easily fitted. The introduction of the ‘FT’ had almost no effect on the number of aircraft produced. However, the lack of a cowling to keep out the worst of the weather made the navigator’s working conditions even more severe than they already were. A more fundamental change in the Pe-2’s design from the 110 series onwards was the introduction of the new VUB-1 glazed turret fitted with a UBT machine gun and continuous belt feed in June 1942. Compared with the ‘FT’, the VUB-1 gave greater firing angles and improved working conditions for the crew. This variant is often mistakenly described in the west as the ‘Pe-2FT’. The ‘Peshka’ would also benefit from the work undertaken by the V Ya Klimov design bureau in 1942, its efforts focusing on augmenting the M-105P and M-105R engines by increasing their boost up to 1050 mm. The motors were designated M-105PF and M-105RF, respectively, and although the first powerplant was rushed into series production after testing, the second turned out to be less successful. The M-105PF, which was originally intended for fighter use and featured a less advantageous propeller gear ratio, was fitted to the Pe-2. This provided something of In the final Pe-2 configuration the an increase in speed for the ‘Peshka’ at low level, but it fell away at altitude navigator’s open turret was replaced by a VUB-1 rotating turret mount owing to a reduction in propeller efficiency. fitted with a UBK 12.7 mm machine Factory Nos 22 and 39 produced 2392 Pe-2s in 1942, and labour gun. The VUB-1 significantly intensity was reduced to 13,200 man-hours compared with 25,300. improved firing angles and eased the In the spring of 1943, Factory No 22 (with V M Myasishchev now filling navigator’s working conditions by protecting his position from the the role of chief designer) was tasked with bringing about a marked elements. The lower hatch mount of improvement in the performance of the Pe-2. The principal external the radio-operator/gunner was fitted difference in machines of this improved type was that the pitot-static tube with a UBT 12.7 mm machine gun, was moved to the windscreen on the pilot’s cockpit. Apart from that, cowlings while the spherical side mounts in the fuselage had a ShKAS 7.62 mm were fitted to the airbrake grids, and on some series aircraft individual engine machine gun that could be relocated exhaust pipes were fitted instead of manifolds. Series production aircraft No from one side to the other as 19/205, with a takeoff weight of 8550 kg (18,845 lbs), developed a maximum necessary speed of 521 km/h at an altitude of 3700 metres (323.5 mph at 12,140 ft) during testing in August 1943. A further series of small changes were incorporated into the design of the Pe-2 in the first half of 1944. All aircraft were fitted with individual exhaust pipes, the radio, bombsight and oxygen equipment were changed, 10 as was the cockpit instrumentation, © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com and small aerodynamic refinements P e were made. The last big change in Pe-2 -2 production came at the very end of D E 1944, when the shape of the leading V E L edge of the outer wing sections was O P changed. This gave an increase of 10-15 M km/h (6-9 mph) in the Pe-2’s range of EN flying speeds, which greatly improved T the aircraft’s handling characteristics on landing. The Pe-2’s ceiling also increased by 600-800 metres (1970-2625 ft). The UPe-2 trainer had an instructor’s By December 1944, a series production Pe-2 boasted a normal takeoff cabin mounted behind the student’s weight of 8400 kg (18,520 lbs), and could achieve a low-level flying speed cockpit. Such trainers were used of 464 km/h (288 mph) and 524 km/h at 3900-4000 metres (325 mph extensively during 1944-45, when the requirements for the training of new at 12,800-13,100 ft). Its range at an altitude of 1000 metres (3300 ft) was pilots were upgraded 1100 km (680 miles) at exactly 80 per cent of maximum speed, and the dive-bomber’s greatest range was 1300 km (800 miles). PHOTO-RECONNAISSANCE From the outset of the Great Patriotic War in June 1941, the Pe-2 was also the preferred candidate for the reconnaissance role, as it had a sufficiently high speed, could carry heavy photographic equipment, was well armed and had good survivability. The first long-range reconnaissance aircraft, fitted with AFA-1 cameras and underslung fuel tanks, were factory numbers 3/25 and 12/27, built as prototypes in July 1941. These were followed by four short-range reconnaissance aircraft that had been hastily reworked to perform this mission through the installation of four aerial cameras in the bomb-bay. Parallel to the bombers, a reconnaissance variant designated ‘Pe-2 A series Pe-2 with powerful M-82F reconnaissance’ entered series production in August 1941 at Factory radial engines. Contrary to No 22. Subsequently the average monthly production for these aircraft expectations, this variant was not extensively used owing to the would sometimes reach 15-20 examples a month – that is to say seven insufficient reliability of the to ten per cent of the Pe-2s manufactured. There was no separate record powerplant and its high fuel kept of the number of Pe-2s built, but a rough estimate based on known consumption, which limited range. In production rates would put the overall figure at 700-800 aircraft. addition, a decision was made to install this engine in the Tu-2 bomber Early series examples of the Pe-2 served as the basis for the reconnaissance and reconnaissance aircraft variant, which meant that these machines lacked many of the characteristic 11 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com