Mitsubishi Betty Equivalent
- Thread starter rob23
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The Martin B-26 would probably be the closest match.
It had comparable range and was used as a torpedo bomber as well.
While the torpedo armed B-26s at Midway and in the Aleutians didn't score any victories, the RAF Marauders did have success in the Mediterranean with their torpedo attacks.
It had comparable range and was used as a torpedo bomber as well.
While the torpedo armed B-26s at Midway and in the Aleutians didn't score any victories, the RAF Marauders did have success in the Mediterranean with their torpedo attacks.
Greg Boeser
1st Sergeant
B-26s even stood in for Betties in the movie A Guy Named Joe.
Americans have gotten the bomber part of the system right. Problem was in their torpedoes; the 'torpedo scandal' was a real deal back then. Actually working and reasonably fast torpedoes would've been a welcome addition to the US arsenal, OTOH if the US aircraft were not carrying a single torpedo the US forces will still kill the IJN surface units anyway.
The Long Lance torpedo was exclusively used by IJN surface units, however.
chris ballance
Airman 1st Class
- 143
- Jul 21, 2022
Don't think the B-26 is a good equivalent, its+40% heavier empty, has twice the engine horse power, and double the bomb load. Using gross weight, the wing loading of the B-26 was +55% greater than the G4M.
Last edited:
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Well that's the closest you're going to get when comparing to US aircraft designed to accomplish the same role. Can you think of another US twin that can carry bombs and torpedoes? Maybe the A-20?
And the B-26 didn't burn like the Betty
chris ballance
Airman 1st Class
- 143
- Jul 21, 2022
Maybe you could load a torpedo into a Douglas B-23 Dragon?
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
If I wanted to die quickly, sure...
I don't think a B-23 "would have" been the prime aircraft to carry a torpedo. It was basically a DC-3 with a different fuselage, a few guns and a bomb bay.
chris ballance
Airman 1st Class
- 143
- Jul 21, 2022
Just crunching numbers, a Savoia-Marchetti SM.79 Sparviero seems like more an equivalent than any American aircraft. I know 3 engines and not American, but wing loads, range, total engine horse power are similar. Bomb load favors the Italian aircraft.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Agree
Thumpalumpacus
Major
Right. I think the aerial torpedo was the Type 91? But all the same, it should be acknowledged that Japanese torpedoes didn't suffer the issues of American detonators of the Mk 13, 14, or 15. As such, the Betty + torpedo weapons system was superior to any American torpedo bomber up until 1943-44, by what I've read.
The B-25J could carry a "glide torpedo" in 1945.
The First Provisional Glide Torpedo Squadron was attached to the 41st BG on Okinawa in mid-1945 carrying out its first mission on 31 July. These weapons could be dropped from 12 miles out from the target so identifying success or failure was difficult.
www.axis-and-allies-paintworks.com
The First Provisional Glide Torpedo Squadron was attached to the 41st BG on Okinawa in mid-1945 carrying out its first mission on 31 July. These weapons could be dropped from 12 miles out from the target so identifying success or failure was difficult.
GT-1 glide torpedo / USAAF / USN Library / Forums - Axis and Allies Paintworks
The GT-1 (Glide Torpedo 1) was an early form of missile developed by the United States Army Air Forces during World War II. Intended to deliver an aerial torpedo at a safe range from the launching aircraft, the weapon proved successful enough in t...
GregP
Major
To me the obvious candidates are the Martin Maryland and Martin Baltimore. Both could have carried torpedos since they could carry equivalent bomb loads but, for some reason, were never so employed. Seems like they were a perfect match for torpedo bomber candidates.
Somehow, though they were fast, they never "caught on."
Somehow, though they were fast, they never "caught on."
Last edited:
Were the bomb bays of the Maryland and Baltimore long enough to take a 16ft 3in long British Mk.XII torpedo? Even longer with a Monoplane Air Tail.
The normal load of these aircraft was 4x500lb bombs. That load would probably be shorter than a torpedo.
chris ballance
Airman 1st Class
- 143
- Jul 21, 2022
Martin Baltimore is in the ball park on wing loading and engine power, even a planed maritime reconnaissance variant with room for a torpedo that never happened.
GregP
Major
I assume torpedoes would be carried externally, like on the B-26. I have not investigated the bomb bays. They just seem close enough to a Betty to be a good equivalent.
Last edited:
chris ballance
Airman 1st Class
- 143
- Jul 21, 2022
The Sm.79, which is well known for its operational history as a torpedo bomber, carried its torpedo externally. The external torpedo would have cost the Martin Baltimore some of its speed, but it would likely still be much faster than a G4M (Maybe faster than a Sm.79?). The Martin Baltimore would also have to give up its bomb bay to fuel tanks to match the range of the Sm.79 or G4M.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The B-26 would be the closest the US had to the G4M's performance profile and combat role.
Yes, it was heavier and somewhat faster, but it's ability to travel over 1,000 miles with a warload of 3,000 pounds is comparable to the G4M.
It's ability to carry a torpedo and having done so during the war, puts it in the same league as the Betty.
I suppose we could mull over all the Army (and Navy) twin types and see what might have or could have done the job, but the Marauder actually did it.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
But here's the situation - I don't believe the Maryland and/ or Baltimore ever carried a torpedo on a combat sortie (correct me if I'm wrong) and was not used operationally (in a combat zone) by the US
