Swordfish vs Devastator

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Juha3 said:
USS Neosho was a fleet oiler armed with four 5"/38 DP guns and four 20 mm Oerlikon.
Click to expand...

See this report:

"Although the three inch fifty caliber anti-aircraft guns fired throughout the attacks it is difficult to evaluate their effectiveness against the enemy. "
Battle of Coral Sea: USS Neosho (AO-23) Action Report

Although she was able to increase speed to 18 knot and did have several 20mm guns, this was still less speed or AA armament than Hermes.

I confess that I got Neosho confused with Neches but it doesn't really change the equation:

USS Neches (AO-5) - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:

It's also really basic that the course an RN ship has to take to Malta is very constrained and Axis recon aircraft were plentiful. An aircraft flying ~100nm from base will arrive at the last reported position in ~40min and even a 30 knot ship can only travel 20nm in that time.
 
Worth pointing out that Pantellaria was a major Axis airbase, there was one at Lampedusa, and there were bases at Bizerta and Cape Bon, as well as Sicily and Sardinia.

Looks like the torpedo boats wrought some serious havoc right by Cape Bon, and the Submarines just before that. The aircraft often failed to get hits but caused more havoc when the convoy got close to Tunis.
 

I'd like to understand your reasoning for your assessed strike range of the Swordfish. I'm pretty certain the 1,100 mile range for the SBD was without weapon load whereas the shorter ranges you quote were applicable when carrying bombs.
 
No the shorter range is actual strike range, including the needed extra fuel to find the target, conduct the strike, fly the return trip, find their carrier and recover. It's always much shorter than the listed operational range. It's consistent in US military records across a wide variety of types.

If you know of a more accurate strike range for the Swordfish, post it.
 

Thanks for the link. I usually check what I read from Wiki, but not in this time, so 3"/50s, not 5"/38s, on Neosho.
 

I already have in an earlier post - 522 miles with normal fuel (no long-range tank in the 3rd cockpit) and with a torpedo. Yes, that's not strike range but it gives some indication. That range could be extended, as was the case at Taranto, with an additional internal fuel tank.

What version of the SBD are you claiming for the 1,000 mile range and what was its bomb load at that range? Range will vary with bomb load so there won't be just one strike radius for an aircraft that can carry different weapon loads.
 
Maximum range for the Dauntless SBD-3 (standard model from Coral sea onward) is reported as between 1,115 miles and 1,370 miles, but for a strike that translates to 325 miles with a 500 lb bomb or 250 miles with a 1,000 lb bomb, according to Navy practice. With no bomb load they could fly out to 400 miles, but usually they carried a bomb even on scouting missions so they could hit targets of opportunity. This is with 310 gallons of fuel.

Source: The Pacific War Online Encyclopedia: SBD Dauntless, American Dive Bomber

522 miles is not a strike range.
 
Schweik said:
Here is a map which may be helpful in the discussion. The choke point was especially at the very end when they were rounding Tunisia.

View attachment 609805
Click to expand...

One thing I notice about this map, is that almost half (3/7) of the air attacks resulted in "no damage". This is not the typical pattern with IJN strikes in 1942. Most of the carnage seems to have been wrought by Italian submarines and Torpedo boats.

It's well known that the IJN surface fleet was also far more dangerous than anything in the Med.
 

Yes, but a few clouds between approaching bombers and their ship targets would complicated the situation and Illustrious was not the only ship in the area. Because a carrier could support a convoy from a fair distance away, there might be a need to spend some time to locate the carrier. Anyway, for some reason Ju 87s attacking Illustrious at sea were carrying 500 kg bombs, or mainly 500 kg bombs, the No. 6 hit was at first estimated to be made by a 500 kg bomb, but later revaluated as a 1000 kg bomb and its entry hole was wide enough for a 1000 kg bomb.
 

I never said 522 miles is a strike range.

My question relates to the range reduction factors you are applying to the Swordfish. It seems like you're saying that the SBD had a 1,000 mile max range and an operational radius, with 1,000lb bomb load, of 250 miles, therefore that same reduction factor of 4 should also apply to the Swordfish (hence 522 miles becomes just north of 100 miles for an operational radius. Am I correct in that interpretation of your math?

My problem with the above is that the 1,000 mile max range doesn't identify what load was being carried to attain that range. The max range cannot possibly be the same for unladen, 500lb bomb load and 1,000lb bomb load configurations since the extra ordinance weight will require more power to be applied for longer during climb-out and to maintain altitude. This fact is borne out by the difference in the numbers you cite between the "no load" operational radius of 400 miles and the operational radius of 350 miles with a 1,000lb bomb load.

The "factor of 4" that you seem to be applying only works if the SBD airframe is loaded identically for both the max range (1,000 miles) and the operational radius (250 miles). If they aren't, then the factor will change, which will impact your analysis of the Swordfish's operational radius. For example, If the 1,000 mile max range is with a 500lb bomb, then the range with a 1,000lb bomb will be considerably less, perhaps 800 miles. This, in turn, reduces the factor from 4 to about 3 between max range and operational radius.
 
I never said that the way to determine the actual strike range of the Swordfish was to divide exactly by four. It was speculation, a guess which I indicated when I wrote "To me that suggests..."

The way to determine the actual strike range of the Swordfish is to find it written down in British records which I'm certain is available somewhere. That kind of record would overrule any and all speculation.

Also, the maximum range with a bomb for the SBD was ~1100- 1350 miles, as noted above. So the ratio to strike range with a 1,000 bomb was actually 4.48 (if we take the lower range value) or 5.4 if we take the higher.

However all that said, an operational range of the Swordfish being roughly half that of the SBD, it does stand to reason that it's range with a torpedo would be less than half of the range of the SBD with the heavier 1,000 lb bomb. I say less than half because a torpedo is considerably larger, heavier, and draggier than a 1,000 lb bomb, and because the Swordfish itself had more drag and flew at a lower altitude. The Swordfish ceiling was 16,000 ft and their cruising altitude was considerably lower than that from what I understand (Wikipedia says 5,000 ft though I have no idea if that is accurate). Did they even normally carry oxygen? The SBD had a ceiling of 25,000 ft and usually cruised at 18,000 ft, though of course that all depended on the range to the target and other factors. Cruising at 18,000 ft means much less drag.

So my guess is that the actual strike range of a Swordfish with a torpedo was more in the order of ~ 100 miles or so, maybe even less. But I do not claim this is anything other than a casual guess, for the record.
 
Schweik said:
Also, the maximum range with a bomb for the SBD was ~1100- 1350 miles, as noted above.
Click to expand...

Again, I'd like to know what the actual ranges were with the actual bomb load(s). I see lots of claims about the range of the SBD but none of them specify the actual weapon load, which makes direct comparisons difficult.

Schweik said:
So my guess is that the actual strike range of a Swordfish was more in the order of ~ 100 miles or so. Never claimed it was anything other than a guess, for the record.
Click to expand...

But that's exactly my point. You keep saying the Swordfish had inadequate range for the Pacific Theater and yet its range WITH a torpedo was better than that of the Devastator WITHOUT a torpedo...and that's before we consider putting the long-range tank into the Swordfish.

My frustration is that you keep asserting short range for the Swordfish with no actual source data to prove it, while ignoring the fact that it had longer range than the TBD (which is the whole thrust of this thread, anyway).
 
buffnut453 said:
Again, I'd like to know what the actual ranges were with the actual bomb load(s). I see lots of claims about the range of the SBD but none of them specify the actual weapon load, which makes direct comparisons difficult.
Click to expand...

You seemed to have missed my previous reply to the same claim, so I'll repeat it. To help, I have bolded the relevant sections:

Maximum range for the Dauntless SBD-3 (standard model from Coral sea onward) is reported as between 1,115 miles and 1,370 miles, but for a strike that translates to 325 miles with a 500 lb bomb or 250 miles with a 1,000 lb bomb, according to Navy practice. With no bomb load they could fly out to 400 miles, but usually they carried a bomb even on scouting missions so they could hit targets of opportunity. This is with 310 gallons of fuel.

Source: The Pacific War Online Encyclopedia: SBD Dauntless, American Dive Bomber


The comparison between the TBD and the Swordfish was settled many pages ago, and there are two versions of it, which I believe I can summarize:

Version 1: Both the TBD and the Swordfish were obsolete embarassments of combat aircraft, but the Swordfish was slightly better, mainly due to having radar.
Version 2: The Swordfish was better, and it was great!

The one thing that I can say in defense of the TBD is that they very wisely only made 130 of them. The reason the Swordfish ends up being compared with these other naval aircraft like the Japanese B5N, B6N, D3A, and D4Y, the German Ju 87, and the US TBF and SBD, is that the latter were direct competitors. The Albacore was also both a competitor and a stablemate.

So the conversation broadened a bit.

My source for the short range of the Swordfish is basically every single online reference to the Swordfish, which quotes a range (carrying a torpedo) of about 520 miles. Which is extremely short range for a naval strike aircraft. The recent discussion was on calculating an estimate for an actual strike range, but I don't have any data on that, so I can only guess. I have a lot of books on WW2 aircraft but the Swordfish isn't one of them, I mostly skipped the biplanes.
 
Last edited:
According to that same site by the way, the TBF had a maximum range of 1215 miles (1955 km) at 153 mph (246 km/h) with full weapons load, or 1450 miles (2330 km) as a scout, which translated to 259 miles (417 km) nominal combat radius with a 1,600 lb torpedo.

Source: The Pacific War Online Encyclopedia: TBF Avenger, U.S. Carrier Torpedo Bomber

The same site does have an entry for the Swordfish but it is much more limited, showing only the same range number as the others

The Pacific War Online Encyclopedia: Swordfish, British Carrier Torpedo Bomber
 
Here is a decent video on the early FAA and the attack on Taranto. It has some nice footage of Swordfish operating off carriers.


The range was 175 miles, completed at night, with just 2 losses in combat with the rest all rtb.

Its interesting at the end how it is noted that the Swordfish, attacking at night, were 6 times more efficient than the B5ns attacking in daylight at Pearl Harbor. That night attack was without radar and using flares to illuminate the targets.

The RN was quite ready and trained for night action and proved it in the Mediteranean and at, Battle of the Malacca Strait - Wikipedia , against the IJN.

Nagumo was quite right to be scared of the RN fleet under Somerville. I think that many historians brush off the early maneuverings, by both forces, in the Indian Ocean as unimportant. It was a high stakes game of poker with almost a winner takes all. A daylight action favours Nagumo, night time Somerville. They did come very close to a deadly action.

Here's a short account of the Battle of Ceylon"
 

Attachments

  • 10-stuart_e.pdf
    299.6 KB · Views: 61
I've already posted how JU87-Rs were able to sink HMS Southhampton in Jan 1941 at ~300 miles from their bases:

Actual range the SBD-5:

Performance of SBD-5 ( USN Pacific Fleet Air Force report dated 26 oct 1943)
Cruising Performance test

"...It is to be noted that the indicated attack range of 600 miles under
the favorable conditions of the performance test is far less than the
range of 1,370 miles claimed for the SBD-5 with 1,000 pound load, It
is also materially less Than the figure of 1,150 miles claimed by BuAero
as the maximum cruising range of the SBD-5 with 1,000 pound bomb.

Combat experience in the Solomons demonstrated that under the ex-
acting air operational conditions obtained there the range of the
with a 1,000 pound bomb was 500 miles. Commander Air Group, USS Saratoga
reported that the working search radius of the Group's SBDs was about
230 miles - "That would be the absolute maximum". The results of the
performance test tend to show that the range of the SBD-5 in spite of
its increased weight should not be less than that of the SBD-3 and 4..."

Similarly Skuas sank Konigsberg at ~300nm from their base.
 

At Philippine Sea the USN sent a large strike force to ~300nm and something like 30% of the strike aircraft despatched, ended up running out of fuel, including, IIRC about 25% of the TBFs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

W
Narvik Swordfish
Replies
3
Views
939
buffnut453
S
Spitfire vs. Dora mass battle
Replies
1
Views
88
PAT303
P
Sakai Saburo Vs Sugita Sho-ichi
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
4K
GrauGeist
Supercharging & stuff - losses, improvements, good vs. bad. vs. excellent etc
2 3
Replies
44
Views
3K
Bretoal2
B
A
Best WW2 Seafire vs. best A6M Zero
Replies
9
Views
1K
Shortround6
S
Menu
Log in
Register