May 1943. Allied maritime attack capability

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Sep 8, 2012

stona said:
It may not be one of his better attempts,I'm not sure why we'd drop 100 bombs on a freighter,but the attack he highlighted would be fairly typical. Others have proffered the Bismark Sea,Kanal Kamf,Tirpitz as examples.The example of the Channel convoy I gave was regarded as a resounding success by the Luftwaffe at the time as I believe was the Battle of the Bismarck Sea by the Allies.
On every occassion many,sometimes hundreds,of aircraft sorties were needed to sink a few ships.
Noone so far has provided any examples of aircraft bombing ships with outstanding accuracy during WW2. That would seem to be the exception rather than the rule. It may explain why all combatants were developing better and better guided anti-ship weapons as the war drew to a close. In extreme cases they were developing human guided suicide "missiles". They were also attempting less successful weapons,I remember film of a Fw 190 dropping a rocket powered "bouncing bomb whose first rocket powered bounce was more than a kilometre!
Steve

You are correct, but the point that Dave is missing, is that you can't determine capability based off of one account.

pinsog · Sep 8, 2012

I wonder what the crews of the Hiryu, Soryu, Kaga and Akagi thought of the US Navy's antiship capabilities? And they had fighter cover over their ships while most of their attackers did not.

stona · Sep 8, 2012

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
You are correct, but the point that Dave is missing, is that you can't determine capability based off of one account.

Yes,you are quite right.

Cheers

Steve

stona · Sep 8, 2012

pinsog said:
I wonder what the crews of the Hiryu, Soryu, Kaga and Akagi thought of the US Navy's antiship capabilities? And they had fighter cover over their ships while most of their attackers did not.

The Pacificic theatre is outside my realm really but again I would pose the question of how many sorties were required to do the deed? How many bombs and torpedoes were dropped?

We all know the cost,entire squadrons almost annihilated.

There were also fortuitous circumstances,often vital in war,that accompanied the bombing of three of those ships (Kaga,Soryu,Akagi). It is also self evident that an aircraft carrier is just about the biggest naval target that can be engaged. The four bombs that hit Hiryu might all have missed a steamer in the English Channel.

Cheers

Steve

pinsog · Sep 8, 2012

stona said:
The Pacificic theatre is outside my realm really but again I would pose the question of how many sorties were required to do the deed? How many bombs and torpedoes were dropped?

We all know the cost,entire squadrons almost annihilated.

There were also fortuitous circumstances,often vital in war,that accompanied the bombing of three of those ships (Kaga,Soryu,Akagi). It is also self evident that an aircraft carrier is just about the biggest naval target that can be engaged. The four bombs that hit Hiryu might all have missed a steamer in the English Channel.

Cheers

Steve

A freighter may be smaller, but they are also 1/3 to 1/2 as fast as a carrier, a fraction of the AA guns, and generally aren't being covered by a swarm of Zeros. I personally wouldn't want to be on a Japanese freighter being strafed and skip bombed by a late model B25 either.

Milosh · Sep 9, 2012

How well did Coastal Command do in attacks on ships in the North Sea and along the coast of Norway?

syscom3 · Sep 9, 2012

pinsog said:
I wonder what the crews of the Hiryu, Soryu, Kaga and Akagi thought of the US Navy's antiship capabilities? And they had fighter cover over their ships while most of their attackers did not.

They had contempt for the USN. But the crews of their sister carriers, the Shōkaku and Zuikaku had a different perspective from the Coral Sea where they got bloodied.

pinsog · Sep 9, 2012

syscom3 said:
They had contempt for the USN. But the crews of their sister carriers, the Shōkaku and Zuikaku had a different perspective from the Coral Sea where they got bloodied.

Did they still have contempt for US Navy fliers on June 8, 1942?

syscom3 · Sep 9, 2012

You mean June 5th. No they did not. They had just been cured of their "victory disease".

Jabberwocky · Sep 10, 2012

In the MTO in 1942/early 1943 the RAF and Coastal Command used small groups of torpedo bombers (typically 4-8 Hampdens, Beauforts or even Bisleys), along with 2-6 Beaufighters with bombs, escorted by more Beaufighters (3-6) for flak suppression. The mixed unit tactics were quite successful.

The Beaufighters would go in first, straffing and bombing to draw flak and hit any escort vessels. The torpedo bombers would then follow, aiming for any larger merchant craft.

The aerial torpedo was the primary weapon for these operations, but low level bombing (low angle dive bombing from about 2000 to 300 ft) was successfully used as well.

From June/July 1943, the tactics changed, with the introduction of the 60 lb RP. Now the flak suppression Beaufighters would also be armed with rocket projectiles, and they actively hunted the escorts, rather than just suppressing them. Increasingly, bombs and torpedoes were traded for RPs during 1943, as more aircraft were converted with rocket rails and tactics were refined.

These tactics were also developed in the waters around the UK, Denmark and Norway, notaby with the Banff and Dallachy strike wings. By mid 1944, these two units could mount a combined strike force of better than 60 aircraft, not counting fighter escorts.

vikingBerserker · Sep 10, 2012

I'm actually reading about the USN VPB-109 right now that operated in the PTO and flying the PB4Y-1 -2 they seem to do a pretty good job at low level attacks on shipping. Though they did start in August of 43

oldcrowcv63 · Sep 11, 2012

The attack on the 4 carriers at Midway did not involve the anihilation of entire squadrons of dive bombers. VB-6 was hard hit and suffered something like 30% casualties because they happened to depart at low altitude through a particularly heavy concentration of CAP fighters and also ran afoul of escort fighters from the Hiryu counterstrike that departed at about the same time. The latter effort hit the USN SBDs rather hard but also stripped away the escorts from the IJN VALs which subsequently suffered even worse (~60% casualties) at the hands of the USN VF-3 CAP. The only squadrons lost or suffering even worse losses than VB/VS-6 were the ones that did essentially no material damage: the Midway based rookies and the VT squadrons flying the TBD Devastators. In contrast, Yorktown's VB-3 got away essentially free of damage except for a pair ditched from fuel exhaustion while waiting to land on the damaged carrier.

oldcrowcv63 · Sep 11, 2012

IIRC, 10-12 hits or damaging near misses on the three IJN carriers were obtained out of approximately 40 bombs dropped. I believe the IJN VB obtained 3 out of 7 dropped.

gjs238 · Sep 11, 2012

vikingBerserker said:
I'm actually reading about the USN VPB-109 right now that operated in the PTO and flying the PB4Y-1 -2 they seem to do a pretty good job at low level attacks on shipping. Though they did start in August of 43

Would be awesome to see some action photos of that strategic bomber sized aircraft down low!

vikingBerserker · Sep 15, 2012

There are a couple of really good pics taken of attacks at a height of 200ft, but my )@#*($)# scanner just died! I will scan them when I can.

May 1943. Allied maritime attack capability

More options

DerAdlerIstGelandet

Private Chemtrail Disperser

pinsog

Tech Sergeant

stona

Major

stona

Major

pinsog

Tech Sergeant

Milosh

Senior Master Sergeant

syscom3

Pacific Historian

pinsog

Tech Sergeant

syscom3

Pacific Historian

Jabberwocky

Staff Sergeant

vikingBerserker

Lieutenant General

oldcrowcv63

Tech Sergeant

oldcrowcv63

Tech Sergeant

gjs238

Tech Sergeant

vikingBerserker

Lieutenant General

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads