SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
That sounds to me like the Reggia Aeronautica was a more efficient torpedo attacker than other nations services, at least up to 1944. I am assuming that the RA was attacking moving targets.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
That sounds to me like the Reggia Aeronautica was a more efficient torpedo attacker than other nations services, at least up to 1944. I am assuming that the RA was attacking moving targets.2. The experimental unit formed on 25 July 1940 took just 7 aircraft modified as torpedo bombers into service between 23 July and 5 Aug 1940. After that first unsuccessful mission to Alexandria in August, the unit had just 4 crews. It was retitled 278 Squadriglia Autonoma Aerosiluranti on 3 Sept 1940, (the surviving 4 crews earning it the nickname "Quattro Gatti"). It achieved its first hit (on the cruiser Kent) on 17 Sept. In the first 4 months it achieved 4 hits on 3 RN cruisers for an expenditure of 37 torpedoes and that one loss.
Not always.That sounds to me like the Reggia Aeronautica was a more efficient torpedo attacker than other nations services, at least up to 1944. I am assuming that the RA was attacking moving targets.
All good points you've made before. In this instance I'm bemoaning an earlier interwar appreciation for RAF Coastal Command and RAF torpedo strike in general. Yes, it's give and take, so something will have to go elsewhere, but ideally you don't want to enter WW2 with the Vilderbeest as your torpedo bomber.As for RAF equipment, as discussed many times before, timing was everything. The 2,000lb AP bomb was developed interwar as was a dedicated torpedo bomber also able to carry it - the Beaufort which entered service in Nov 1939 and became operational in 1940. If only everyone, including Hitler knew war would begin in Sept 1939 & not 1942 or 1944.
A good points you've made before. In this instance I'm bemoaning an earlier interwar appreciation for RAF Coastal Command and RAF torpedo strike in general. Yes, it's give and take, so something will have to go elsewhere, but ideally you don't want to enter WW2 with the Vilderbeest as your torpedo bomber.
Even 4 squadrons of Blenheims would have been a major improvement and pushed out air cover by around 200 miles for anti-sub work.In retrospect, even 10% of the airframes dedicated to Bomber Command instead being diverted to Coastal Command would have worked wonders..
It didn't have the unreliable magnetic pistol used on the Marks 14 and 15. It was also slower which meant the contact pistol was less likely not to detonate.I was told by a member here that the Mk 13 used a different initiator than the Mk 14, resulting in a modest improvement in reliability. I can't remember who it was who told me that, though.
The aircraft lost fruitless bombing French ports in 1942 could have been far better used in convoy escort.In retrospect, even 10% of the airframes dedicated to Bomber Command instead being diverted to Coastal Command would have worked wonders..
It didn't have the unreliable magnetic pistol used on the Marks 14 and 15. It was also slower which meant the contact pistol was less likely not to detonate.
I like the name Other Poster maybe I should change to it.I believe you were the one who corrected me on that score and are the unmentioned "other poster". Thanks.
The British Govt & Chiefs of Staff get a lot of criticism but they had very limited wriggle room with Britain fighting alone at the end of 1940 and fast running out of money. Resources had to be prioritised to those theatres where fighting was actually going on. Firstly a quick look at what Britain faced around the world from early 1941.Given the situation in the Atlantic and MTO by end of 1940, is there anything Britain could have reasonably have done throughout 1941 to better prepare for the coming war with Japan?
Given the situation in the Atlantic and MTO by end of 1940, is there anything Britain could have reasonably have done throughout 1941 to better prepare for the coming war with Japan?
Singapore has always had a water problem due to its expansion as a trading centre. It was only in 2016 that the Govt claimed it was self sufficient in water supply.Design and construct a secure water supply for Singapore, make sure there were enough supplies for an extended siege, and improve the hard defenses.
While not a war winner, as far as I and my war-gaming friends can determine, this would have made the biggest single difference in the original timeline - and it was relatively cheap and easily doable. It could have bought a significant amount of time, but for whatever reason this was not done in the time available.
The question of submarines is an interesting one because so many had been deployed at Hong Kong & Singapore pre-war only to be withdrawn between Sept 1939 & June 1940 as there was a greater need elsewhere.Otherwise, build and deploy more long range submarines and their support units.
Or both of the above.
This is where even a half squadron of three RN submarines loitering off the FIC coast might have helped gather the intel on troop ships, etc.The question of submarines is an interesting one because so many had been deployed at Hong Kong & Singapore pre-war only to be withdrawn between Sept 1939 & June 1940 as there was a greater need elsewhere.
Not true. The only torpedo hits obtained by a Japanese light cruisers were at Savo Island when Tenryu hit Quincy with 2, but these were old fashioned wet heater 21" torpedoes NOT type 93. The Yubari hit Vincennes with one 24" torpedo but some doubt that Yubari was converted to use type 93s so that may have also have been a wet heater type. Note that this was launched at a range of 2400yds against a ship that had already been pounded into a flaming wreck so speed was irrelevant.The Japanese CL's had plenty of type 93 torpedoes, were well armed, and did very well in combat. This is a reach.
Bill announced he was quitting the forum back at the beginning of April and hasn't been seen since.Not true. The only torpedo hits obtained by a Japanese light cruisers were at Savo Island when Tenryu hit Quincy with 2, but these were old fashioned wet heater 21" torpedoes NOT type 93. The Yubari hit Vincennes with one 24" torpedo but some doubt that Yubari was converted to use type 93s so that may have also have been a wet heater type. Note that this was launched at a range of 2400yds against a ship that had already been pounded into a flaming wreck so speed was irrelevant.
Can't say I'll miss him. I used to find his posts interesting but his habit of escalating exchanges into name calling became tedious and I stopped reading most of his posts. I was never personally offended, in fact the one time I recall him mocking me was actually funny. On the other hand I found some of what he said to others to be appalling. If you think someone is an idiot don't call him that, prove it. As far as I'm concerned if someone insults me I've won the argument.Bill announced he was quitting the forum back at the beginning of April and hasn't been seen since.