Mk 13 aerial torpedo (1 Viewer)

[CD Baumann]

The Mk 13 torpedo. It sucked. At least at first. As I'm sure most of us are aware it struggled in combat till 1944 when they got the bugs worked out. What I'd like to know is in that two year period was the USN able to use some workarounds, like with the mk 14 submarine variant, to get her functioning?
For example: sub commanders were told to subtract 10 feet from any depth estimates because the mk14 ran too low. They also had to switch from the magnetic fuze to a contact fuze. The latter needed to have her during pistol beefed up as she fired a projectile that was too light to explode the warhead.
So to reiterate, did they have any workarounds for the mk13 aerial version like this?

 

[AerialTorpedoDude69]

The Mk 23 torpedo. It sucked. At least at first. As I'm sure most of us are aware it struggled in combat till 1944 when they got the bugs worked out. What I'd like to know is in that two year period was the USN able to use some workarounds, like with the mk 14 submarine variant, to get her functioning?
For example: sub commanders were told to subtract 10 feet from any depth estimates because the mk14 ran too low. They also had to switch from the magnetic fuze to a contact fuze. The latter needed to have her during pistol beefed up as she fired a projectile that was to light to explode the warhead.
So to reiterate, did they have any workarounds for the mk13 aerial version like this?

I don't know the answer to your question, but I read part of and skimmed most of an outstanding book on torpedo technology "Iron Men and Tin Fish" which covers all the torpedoes used or made by the US Navy from the Civil War on. The book spent a lot of time covering why the magnetic exploders sucked (new technology that was not fully tested and was therefore unreliable). But the exploder itself wasn't the only problem and it overshadowed other serious issues with the USN's torpedo program.

The main issue was that the navy had refused to do adequate testing on all of its torpedoes because of money constraints. So the Mk. 23 wasn't the only bad torpedo. All US torpedoes were riddled with issues that even basic testing would have revealed. These things didn't even run straight most of the time. Although the Mk. 13 was regarded as having the same issues as the Mark 23 as they both used contact exploders. I don't remember anything in the book dealing with field mods. The field mods that I'm aware of were applied to the Mk. 14 and other magnetic exploder-equipped torpedoes. They simply removed the magnetic exploder and replaced it with a gun exploder, as you mentioned.

IIRC, the Mark 13 had issues with workmanship and poor quality materials. .It also lacked a "drag ring" and a "shroud ring" (meaning it wasn't hydrodynamically stable and wasn't reinforced enough to always survive contact with water at speed). But the book didn't mention much about how engineers jury-rigged field modifications for the Mark 13. IIRC, the book said that they just dealt with crappy torpedoes up until at least 1943. I should reread it as I didn't go through it as thoroughly as I should have.

I have a vague memory of the USN reverse engineering the Japanese box tails that allowed for their torpedoes to run correctly when dropped at high speed and low altitude. It's probable that they did field testing of that modification.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

The Mk 13 shared some of the flaws of the Mk14. It had a different detonator, as I understand, and so wasn't as prone to firing-pin shearing, but it not only shared the issues with running at proper depth, but added in a dangerous low-and-slow attack profile until the above-mentioned fins and boxes were added. It was pretty useful after that.

I think the last time they were used was in the Korean war to attack a dam. No 100 ft / 100 kt drops here.

 

[CD Baumann]

I don't know the answer to your question, but I read part of and skimmed most of an outstanding book on torpedo technology "Iron Men and Tin Fish" which covers all the torpedoes used or made by the US Navy from the Civil War on. The book spent a lot of time covering why the magnetic exploders sucked (new technology that was not fully tested and was therefore unreliable). But the exploder itself wasn't the only problem and it overshadowed other serious issues with the USN's torpedo program.

The main issue was that the navy had refused to do adequate testing on all of its torpedoes because of money constraints. So the Mk. 23 wasn't the only bad torpedo. All US torpedoes were riddled with issues that even basic testing would have revealed. These things didn't even run straight most of the time. Although the Mk. 13 was regarded as having the same issues as the Mark 23 as they both used contact exploders. I don't remember anything in the book dealing with field mods. The field mods that I'm aware of were applied to the Mk. 14 and other magnetic exploder-equipped torpedoes. They simply removed the magnetic exploder and replaced it with a gun exploder, as you mentioned.

IIRC, the Mark 13 had issues with workmanship and poor quality materials. .It also lacked a "drag ring" and a "shroud ring" (meaning it wasn't hydrodynamically stable and wasn't reinforced enough to always survive contact with water at speed). But the book didn't mention much about how engineers jury-rigged field modifications for the Mark 13. IIRC, the book said that they just dealt with crappy torpedoes up until at least 1943. I should reread it as I didn't go through it as thoroughly as I should have.

I have a vague memory of the USN reverse engineering the Japanese box tails that allowed for their torpedoes to run correctly when dropped at high speed and low altitude. It's probable that they did field testing of that modification.

My dad has a book, The War Under the Pacific, and it spoke of all the woes US torpedoes had at the start. They said the same thing, the mk13/14 was tested under very controlled circumstances and without a warhead so when armed it plunged deeper than estimated. They also said the magnetic exploder worked a little too well. The theory was as the torp passed under a ship's hull the magnetic field would cause it to detonate. But in a different hemisphere nearer the equator they didn't realize that the magnetic field from a ship was being warped out sideways causing premature detonation. So they switched to contact detonation.

Allegedly, the pellet the contact exploder fired was replaced with a heavier one salvaged from propeller blades from shot down Japanese aircraft from Pearl Harbor.

 

[MIflyer]

Best book I know of on US WW2 torps is "Hellions of the Deep" by Robert Cannon. The problems were fixed because, after a joint US Industry and Harvard team successfully developed the air launched acoustic homing torpedo, which sank a U-boat on its first combat use, the USN decided to give them the job of fixing the Mark 13 and the other existing torpedoes. Giving up on those clowns at the Newport Torpedo Station was key to eventual success. By the way, the Mark 13 was also adopted by the later PT-boats, which dispensed with torpedo tubes and just dumped the torps over the side, that method of delivery being no more severe than dropping them from an airplane. That saved a lot of weight for the PT's.

 

[elbmc1969]

I strongly recommend reading "Wolves without Teeth," which is about the Germans' attempts to deal with the failures of the fuses in their torpedoes. It's almost always portrayed as, "They had problems in Norway, but then the fixed everything." That is entirely untrue.

High level officers were court martialed for dereliction of duty.

 

[SaparotRob]

I strongly recommend reading "Wolves without Teeth," which is about the Germans' attempts to deal with the failures of the fuses in their torpedoes. It's almost always portrayed as, "They had problems in Norway, but then the fixed everything." That is entirely untrue.

High level officers were court martialed for dereliction of duty.

What was the name of guy who ran BuOrd? The "Mark 14 torpedo is just fine" guy?

 

[MIflyer]

Was it ADM Lockwood? The USN rotated their most promising officers through the Newport station and they all KNEW they had done an exceptional job. The problem HAD to be
incompetent captains. By the way, the Newport Station, with its workforce of unfireable civilian craftsmen, could, by really working hard, produce 50 torpedoes a month. THE ACTUAL WARTIME REQUIREMENT WAS 1500 A MONTH!

Clay Blair's enormous 2 volume set "Silent Victory" goes into detail on the US torpedo failures. I do not recall anything about German torp failures in his his enormous 2 volume set "Hitler's U-Boat War."

 

[Barrett]

One of my finest sources and a valued friend was VADM Bill Martin who became Mr. Night Attack Aviation in WW II. He said that of 30-some torpedoes that VT-10 launched, "none ran hot-straight, and normal." Some took off with their noses above water "like a runaway rhinoceros."

Which is why TBFs relied far more on bombs than torpedoes well into 1943.

Sidebar: around 1993 I met a WW II sub skipper who'd served throughout the war. I asked him if there'd been any prewar concerns about torpedoes and he said "It wasn't even a topic for discussion."

Heartily concur that Gannon's "Hellions" is a must-pump.

 

[ThomasP]

re

Clay Blair's enormous 2 volume set "Silent Victory" goes into detail on the US torpedo failures. I do not recall anything about German torp failures in his his enormous 2 volume set "Hitler's U-Boat War."

Although it is remotely possible that he was not aware of the German torpedo problems, until shown otherwise I would assume he left it out to prevent comparison with - and distraction from - his subject.

 

[SaparotRob]

Was it ADM Lockwood? The USN rotated their most promising officers through the Newport station and they all KNEW they had done an exceptional job. The problem HAD to be
incompetent captains. By the way, the Newport Station, with its workforce of unfireable civilian craftsmen, could, by really working hard, produce 50 torpedoes a month. THE ACTUAL WARTIME REQUIREMENT WAS 1500 A MONTH!

Clay Blair's enormous 2 volume set "Silent Victory" goes into detail on the US torpedo failures. I do not recall anything about German torp failures in his his enormous 2 volume set "Hitler's U-Boat War."

No, Adm Lockwood was one the good guys. I think Adm Christie gets the blame. I just rewatched the Drachinifel episode.