Best dive-bomber of the pacific

What was the best dive-bomber in the pacific theater?

  • Total voters
    24
  • Poll closed .

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Yes and thy had to do it at 2400 feet presenting a greater target despite the ability to drop at a faster speed.

So what does this have to do with the best dive bomber? If you're still trying to push the Barracuda I think you have a rather empty argument.
 
Are you meaning knots or MPH?

261 Knots = 300 MPH
270 Knots = 310 MPH
350 Knots = 402 MPH
 

Do what at 2400ft?

I was replying to other posts regarding the barracuda's torpedo bombing capability, but it could have also dropped a 1600lb bomb directly onto the target, rather than a torpedo, which shows the versatility of the aircraft. Eric Brown rated the Barracuda higher than the Sb2C, and I think it is pretty obvious that it was the best allied naval dive bomber, of the war, when all it's capabilities are considered.
 
Drop

According to Torpedoes of World War II put out by the USN (Navweaps.com) the later aerial torpedoes of the war had to be dropped at higher altitudes due to the higher release airspeeds enabled by aircraft being developed at the time. Although the higher speed and altitude seems like a safety net, it also presented a better firing solution for anti aircraft defences, another reason why after WW2 the traditional deployment of aerial torpedoes went away.

So the Barracuda could carry a 1600 pound bomb? How many of those bombs were put on target? Compare the combat record of the Barracuda to the other dive bombers of the period and its performance is mediocre at best.

And I think we know that Eric Brown was HIGHLY biased based on his other evaluations. On paper the Barracuda "should have" been a war winner, its operational record proved to show a different story.
 
Last edited:
FLYBOYJ said:
Drop

According to Torpedoes of World War II put out by the USN


So the Barracuda could carry a 1600 pound bomb? How many of those bombs were put on target?
Click to expand...

I haven't read anything that says that RN torpedoes had to be dropped from such high altitudes.

On 3 April 1944, 42 Barracudas scored 14 bomb hits on the Tirpitz, including 4 of 10 1600lb bombs dropped.
 
FLYBOYJ said:
And between June 5 and 6 1942 about 40 SBDs sunk 4 aircraft carriers and a heavy crusier. What's your point?
Click to expand...

According to Navweaps The three USN carriers had 103 operational SBDs at Midway, but my point is that the Barracuda had relatively few opportunities to attack naval targets, but it did so successfully when it had the chance.
 
RCAFson said:
According to Navweaps The three USN carriers had 103 operational SBDs at Midway, but my point is that the Barracuda had relatively few opportunities to attack naval targets, but it did so successfully when it had the chance.
Click to expand...
And it did, but in the over all picture did it have anything that set it above any of the aircraft listed on here and previously discussed? No. It seems even the Vengeance had a better operational and combat record than the Barracuda.
 
FLYBOYJ said:
And it did, but in the over all picture did it have anything that set it above any of the aircraft listed on here and previously discussed? No. It seems even the Vengeance had a better operational and combat record than the Barracuda.
Click to expand...



In the overall picture:

The SBD had fixed wings.
The SB2C had terrible handling characteristics, and was rejected for RN service, and nearly so for the USN, so the RN rated the Barracuda above all the other available naval divebombers.

The Vengeance was a fixed wing aircraft that was not designed for naval service.
 
Lets see - the title of this thread...


"What was the best dive-bomber in the pacific theater"?

I don't see the word "Naval" in the title.
 
From wikipedia for what its worth. The bolded statementsare from me...

The first Barracudas entered service on 10 January 1943 with 827 Squadron and were deployed in the North Atlantic. Barracudas would eventually equip 24 front line squadrons. From 1944 onwards, the Mk IIs were accompanied in service by radar-equipped (but otherwise similar) Mk III, which were used for anti-submarine work.

The Barracuda first saw action with 810 Squadron aboard HMS Illustrious off the coast of Norway in July 1943 before deploying to the Mediterranean to support the Salerno landings.[8] The following year they entered service in the Pacific Theatre.

The Royal Air Force used the Barracuda Mk II, initially in 1943 with No. 567 Sqn. at RAF Detling. In 1944, similar models went to 667 Sqn. (RAF Gosport), 679 Sqn. (RAF Ipswich) and 691 Sqn. (RAF Roborough). All the aircraft were withdrawn between March and July 1945.[9][10]

Barracudas were used as dive bombers and played a part in a major attack on the German battleship Tirpitz. On 3 April 1944, 42 aircraft from British carriers HMS Victorious and Furious scored 14 direct hits on Tirpitz with 1,600 lb (730 kg) and 500 lb (230 kg) bombs at the cost of one bomber.[11][12] The attack disabled Tirpitz for over two months.

From April 1944, Barracudas of No 827 Squadron aboard Illustrious started operations against Japanese forces, taking part in raids against Sabang in Sumatra (Operation Cockpit).[13] The Barracuda's performance was reduced by the high temperatures[N 1] of the Pacific, with its combat radius being reduced by as much as 30%, and the torpedo bomber squadrons of the fleet carriers of the British Pacific Fleet were re-equipped with Grumman Avengers.[15]

The Barracuda's primary problem in the Pacific was the need to fly over Indonesian mountain ranges to strike at targets on the eastern side of Java, and this necessitated a high altitude performance which the Barracuda's low altitude rated Merlin 32 engine, and its single stage supercharger, could not provide. [N 2] Additionally, carrying maximum underwing bomb loads caused extra drag which further reduced performance over a torpedo equipped Barracuda.[17] However the Light Fleet Carriers of the 11th ACS which joined the BPF in June 1945 were all equipped with a single Barracuda and single Corsair squadron, so by VJ day the BPF had five Avenger and four Barracuda squadrons embarked on its carriers.[18]

Barracudas were used to test several innovations including RATOG rockets for takeoff and a braking propeller which slowed the aircraft by reversing the blade pitch.

The Barracuda continued in Fleet Air Arm service until the mid 1950s, by which time they were all replaced by Avengers.

Hmmmmmm...............
 
FLYBOYJ said:
Lets see - the title of this thread...


"What was the best dive-bomber in the pacific theater"?

I don't see the word "Naval" in the title.
Click to expand...

Any aircraft that cannot operate from a carrier, will be pretty marginal in the Pacific, IMHO, and hardly worth mentioning.
 
FLYBOYJ said:
From wikipedia for what its worth. The bolded statementsare from me...

[
Click to expand...

As I said, the TBF was a better level bomber, and the RN used it to attack land based targets:

The notes from the wiki article:
[n1] All aircraft are adversely effected by increased temperature and humidity. The effect is to lower engine output and increase the takeoff run. Additionally, windless conditions are common very near the equator, further increasing the takeoff run for carrier aircraft.[14]
[n2] Illustrious then exchanged her Barracudas for the Avengers of 832 and 851 before the next operation, an attack on the oil refineries at Soerbaya, Java. For this strike, the aircraft would have to fly across the breadth of Java. The mountainous spine of the island averages 10,000 ft in height, and this minimum height, coupled with the distance to be flown, about 240 miles, prohibited the use of the essentially low altitude Barracuda."[16]

These strikes in question were made right on the equator. The TBF had a two speed supercharger which gave it better high altitude performance, however the Barracuda could probably have flown the mission with a reduced bomb load. In a naval strike, the Barracuda would fly low for some time, and then climb as the fuel was burned to attack altitude, but the special circumstance of attacking across a mountain chain prevented the use of these tactics.
 
RCAFson said:
As I said, the TBF was a better level bomber, and the RN used it to attack land based targets:

The notes from the wiki article:
[n1] All aircraft are adversely effected by increased temperature and humidity.
Click to expand...

I know - I fly airplanes at 5,600 feet in the summertime and it does get humid where I live.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Second best fighter of World War II
Replies
15
Views
2K
SaparotRob
A
Best British single engined radial aircraft in WW2?
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
Shortround6
S
  • Poll
German multiengine jet bomber best immune to Allied interception
Replies
0
Views
924
Vahe Demirjian
  • Locked
  • Poll
best ww2 bomber
Replies
9
Views
2K
Admiral Beez
A
  • Poll
Which aircraft was the better Russian bomber?
Replies
5
Views
4K
GrauGeist
Menu
Log in
Register