Land-based torpedo planes: what types were the best?

[parsifal]

Ive seen claims here that the 18" (British) air launched topedo was inneffctive, at best lucky in being able to damage warships. History demonstrates very clearly this is not the case. There were many actions that the 18in demostrated its effectiveness. In the med, we of course have the attack at taranto, a night attack wjeree I thnink a number of single hits caused battleships to settle to the ocean bottom (ie sink), others wee hit by two or three with similar results. At Matapan there was of course a singlr hit on the Veneto, which alsmost caused her loss. many consider the armouring scheme in the Veneto to be as extensive as that of the best german warships. There were one or two other raids, one off Sardinia early on that i particularly remember where a hit was scored, and forced the italians to withdraw.

Then of course we have the attack on the Bismarck lucky, maybe, but deadly just the same. without that single hit, she would have got away .

There were no hits on the tirpitz, because she was so heavily protected by torpedo nets and terrain. There were several hits on the two battlecruisers whilst they were couppded up in Brest, each of them causing or contributing considerably to the amount of damage they sufferfed. The BCs were anything but invulnerable to British airborne torpedoes. Not too sure what happened at Kiel, but that torpedo hit, coupled with the mine hits, cou0pled with the unrelaistic refit plans, meant that she nbever sailed in anger again. of course her final demise might also have something to do with Hitlers insistence on scrapping the "useless" surface fleet. a totally misguided decision, but influenced by the need to provide such heavy levels of protection for the heavy ships,, against, you guessed it, these "inneffective" british torpedoes. In a way then the British "inneffective" torpedo ordinance brought about the decommissioning of most of the German gunline surface fleet

 

[tomo pauk]

Saying that any ww2 torpedo was ineffective (ie. the warhead detonation making just small damage) is too much. A torpedo hit blast was not something that was ignored, even for the biggest of warships. The main issue (airborne) torpedo has was that the launch platform was a steady predictable target, while it took a substantial plane to carry one (let alone two). On the other hand, even P-40, Bf-109 or Spitfire can skip-bomb.

 

[yulzari]

1982 showed that 21" MkVIII RN torpedos, that first entered service in 1927, could sink a US cruiser.

An air launched 18" was just about within the armour belt capacity of a heavy warship; but that would only protect a part of the length of the hull and not the screw shafts, screws or rudders so their unscheduled arrival would make it a bad day at the office.

RN thinking was that air launched torpedos would not stop a battleship, nor a heavy cruiser. They were expected to be used to sink lighter vessels. Killing battleships was a job for battleships. Dive bombing Skuas were rated the same even if they sank the elderly Konigsberg cruiser. They did not see any aeroplane that could lift a 21" torpedo off a carrier deck in all weathers. The 18" was expected to be able to damage and slow enemy battleships so that ones own could reach and engage them.

Now, if there were 21" air launched torpedos, then a Lancaster could have lifted them off a land airfield, but the navigation and journey time to target made it very likely (in the North Atlantic/Arctic Ocean context) that they would never have found their target. The target could have changed course and be tens of miles away from the predicted position. Maritime navigation was imprecise and the weather could change before the attackers arrived. Carrier borne aeroplanes could be launched much closer in distance and time in the knowledge of local weather and the target could not have moved too far in the short transit to target.

Hence it made sense at the time to limit air launched torpedos to 18" and limit them to carrier aeroplanes and only fit them to existing land based bomber designs for short range coastal use. By the time radar allowed aeroplanes to find the target, even from a distant land base, massive and also radar guided antiaircraft fire would protect the target so air launched torpedos went out of use except against submarines.

For the Royal Navy the best coastal land based choice was the Beaufighter. Oceanic then the Lancaster (even if it were never used as such it was designed to be able to). The Swordfish was ideal for escort carriers being able to operate in almost all weathers. For fleet carriers it was to have been the Firebrand but the Royal Navy largely gave up on torpedos from fleet carriers in the absence of anything suitable in service. Even the Sea Mosquito was intended to use Highball instead and was post war.

 

[Aurum]

I think that Do 217 P1Y "Ginga" were also very nice land-based torpedo planes as well as Ju 88, B-25, B-26, Beaufort ets. They all had very close capabilities.

 

[yulzari]

The fine action at Taranto should not be taken as a definitive judgement on air launched 18" torpedos.

Firstly they were used as that was what was available. Secondly half the aeroplanes were used as dive bombers. We forget the Swordfish (and Albacore) were designed and used to dive bomb. Lastly I understand that the Italian battleships etc. were with reduced crews being in port. This reduced their damage control capacity. At sea fewer torpedos would have hit and fully crewed damage control parties would have likely controlled some of the resultant damage of those that did hit.

All of this does not diminish the planning, bravery and effect of the action but shows why it was such a brilliant solution to employing the resources available to best effect.

 

[Juha]

RN 18" torpedo was capable to cripple a heavy cruiser or a Panzerschiff/Pocket battleship with one hit, e.g Pola at Matapan and Lützow off Norway.

Juha

 

[silence]

How was the He 111 P-6 (?) as a torp plane? (If nothign else, it looks quite cool!)

 

[parsifal]

The problem for the germans was not so much the aircraft, but early in the war, the poor characteristics of the torpedo they were carrying. They relied significantly on Italian designed torpedoes in the mid war period, and did well with them. Sometime in the mid war period (I think 1942), they introduced a very competent design, and then finally, in the latter stages of the war, began introducing some very advanced designs. by that time it was too late

 

[stug3]

An Italian SM.79 torpedo bomber comes under fire as it begins its attack run on the Operation Pedestal convoy, August 1942

Italian aerial reconnaissance photograph of the convoy.

 

[redcoat]

The problem for the germans was not so much the aircraft, but early in the war, the poor characteristics of the torpedo they were carrying.

Indeed, until May 1940 the only aircraft they had that could fly slow enough to be able to drop the torpedo successfully was the He 59 floatplane !!!!!

 

[redcoat]

. Not too sure what happened at Kiel, but that torpedo hit, coupled with the mine hits, cou0pled with the unrelaistic refit plans, meant that she nbever sailed in anger again.

The Gneisenau was hit by a large bomb dropped by a Bomber Command aircraft while in dry dock, this set off a magazine near the forward turret which destroyed the bow section of the ship.

 

[l'Omnivore Sobriquet]

The Heinkel He-219 was designed at first as a torpedo plane...
I think it would have been good, with a fair range, small frontal aera, with I think one (two?) half internally mounted torpedo. Good speed and stability. I bit of frontal armament too (2 mg151), some rear defense, and certainly a capability to carry a radar set for shipping location whenever available. Non ?

To remain with Herr Heinkel's company, although slightly off topic, how about the He-177 ? The one with the reworked engines arrangments, and the Henshel missiles... And the ship location radar. Range, maneuvrability, punch, a capacity to self locate targets given crude instructions, and a good protection being able to stay away from most of the target's AAA. Plus minimizing time exposure to eventual fighters defense given its speed, defensive weaponry. Yes using air to sea missiles is a bit of 'cheating', (and the implemantation of sea-search radar I think apocriphal) but we certainly hold a good package for late war standards.
Missing just one item, the strategic urge to deploy such an weapon system for a Third Reich having to deal, in mean time with half of Asia crossing the Vistula river and, on the left hand, some two third of America's yearly steel production parading throught the lovely chemins of douce France while most of the rest overflew them in large stratospheric trails, on their way to Herr Heinkel's very factories...

This being said I think the Beaufighter really holds the lead at this stage of the thread.

 

[redcoat]

The Heinkel He-219 was designed at first as a torpedo plane...
I think it would have been good, with a fair range, small frontal aera, with I think one (two?) half internally mounted torpedogood speed. Good speed and stability. I bit of frontal armament too (2 mg151), some rear defense, and certainly a capability to carry a radar set for shipping location whenever available. Non ?
.

One of the He219's major problems was it was underpowered, I'd hate to imagine what it would have been like to fly with two heavy torpedoes strapped to it.

 

[l'Omnivore Sobriquet]

One of the He219's major problems was it was underpowered, I'd hate to imagine what it would have been like to fly with two heavy torpedoes strapped to it.

Torpedo raids don't need much climbing abilities I've been told. One can imagine He-219s cruising low at higher speeds than 'the competition' (Ju-88s to begin with) and launching attack runs at higher speeds too. Without any problem of underpower.
Besides, being under-powered for the He-219 never amounted to being a 'problem', just a characteristic, that grew with time. Taking out the four 20mm ventral package and replacing it with a heavy torpedo one would not hamper flying nor mission capacity. Just avoid short airfields... And escape runs promising quite remarkable.

 

[fastmongrel]

Did the A26 Invader ever carry torpedoes. It would have a good performance and plenty of range.

 

[stug3]

An aerial torpedo caught in the paravane wire of the PORT CHALMERS. The ship could not slow down to free the torpedo for fear that it would explode against the ship's side. In the end the whole paravane fitted was ditched and the torpedo exploded harmlessly on the bottom.

 

[parsifal]

that would be very scary....one good gust of wind to blow the contact pistol against the ship, and it would be good night.