Quoted Text
Talk to he very few Egyptians who survived Mitla pass in '67.
I recall reading some article about how the Israelis viewed fighter-bomber attacks on armor, and it seemed like they didn't so much expect to destroy tanks as to knock them out with relatively minor damage, and break up their unit cohesion. The article mentioned the IAA liked to use napalm because it gave them a chance of doing at least some damage to armored vehicles and at times that was all it took.
Photos of Mitla Pass suggest that unarmored and lightly armored vehicles were badly damaged or destroyed, tanks more often just looked abandoned. However photos from across Sinai in 1967 are similar, showing tanks and tank destroyers abandoned by their crews when they found themselves out-maneuvered and cut off from the rest of the army, so that state of affairs wasn't unique to units attacked from the air.
I don't know if the author of the video being discussed here is right when he says few tanks were knocked out by air attack, perhaps. If that was the case then researchers should have found authoritative evidence, like official reports on the effectiveness of fighter bomber attacks on heavy armor, surely one or more armies or air forces conducted such studies which must have been available to the public for decades.
A military photographer I knew many years ago became unpopular with the pilots of NATO fighter bombers when his photographic evidence showed that their claimed hits in training exercises were somewhat exaggerated. So I can accept that air attack didn't destroy as many tanks as the pilots thought, but I also accept that it didn't matter. Damaged tanks with no infantry support and no supplies aren't going to accomplish much, so the Typhoons and Jugs stopped those panzers just as surely as if they had torched each one.
However, while I understand that on the internet everyone is an expert (rolls eyes), the existence of a video posted on YouTube or wherever is not as persuasive as primary evidence. Perhaps the creator of this video is right, but it isn't like he has created an open-and-shut case. An OKW report on tank losses to FBs would be a different matter.
TOS Moderator
