Swordfish vs Devastator

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



You do have to be careful with Wiki ;

The huge increase in range was due to the increase in fuel from 335 gallons to 726 gallons, however this increase in fuel was due to two 58 gallon drop tanks (wing mounted tanks) and a 275 gallon auxiliary tank mounted in the bomb bay. (specialized internal tank). Which rather limits the usefulness of the extra range for combat.

Due to the increase of nearly 2750lbs gross weight in the later TBM-1Cs Grumman investigated other engines and settled on the 1900hp R-2600-20 which powered 4657 of the TBM-3 version form April of 19444 on.

Source Grumman Aircraft since 1929 by Rene J Francillon
 

I don't know about the foot dragging. They ordered 285 TBF-1s and one XTBF-2 on Dec 30th 1940, 7 months before the XTBF-1 flew and it needed a fair amount of change.
Engine moved forward to correct CG problems, insufficient engine cooling, and vertical surfaces that were too small. The XTBF-1 crashed Nov 28th 1941 with only 25 hours of flying time. First production plane wasn't rolled out the door until Jan 3rd 1942.
The navy might not have had much choice if it wanted torpedo bombers as part of the force mix?
 
FLYBOYJ said:
IIRC by Midway there were only 100 operational due to attrition
Click to expand...

I read that there were 39 left in service after Midway - it was definitely on its way out, but what choice did the units have but to use them? Why would you leave serviceable aircraft on the ground when your territory is being threatened?
 

I think it was a request for some ability to approach at medium altitude, to overfly screening ships, and then be able to dive steeply to release altitude. The TBF could not use a DB attack profile but it had a high enough VNE that a fairly steep approach could be used, especially when the Mk13's allowable drop speeds increased. OTOH, the RN TBs could all use a true DB attack profile as could the SB2C-4/5 after they acquired the rapid changeover gear to convert to a TB.
 

I would think someone would have been aware of the TBD's shortcomings and saw the need to expedite TBM production. Granted you had training and logistic challenges

nuuumannn said:
I read that there were 39 left in service after Midway - it was definitely on its way out, but what choice did the units have but to use them? Why would you leave serviceable aircraft on the ground when your territory is being threatened?
Click to expand...
A good point but RCAF posted the Yorktown's Coral Sea action report. That should have raised eyebrows but then again if the TBD would have been held back from Midway, the outcome may have been way different!
 
FLYBOYJ said:
That should have raised eyebrows but then again if the TBD would have been held back from Midway, the outcome may have been way different!
Click to expand...

Exactly... Putting that report into context, given that the TBD was already being replaced, that was perhaps not the biggest reveal of the report, the torpedo problems are more significant and far reaching, as they turned out to be. By the Coral Sea action, the TBD's days are numbered anyways and I'm picking the guy who wrote that report knew that, but you'd still throw whatever you've got at the enemy. Fascinating stuff though.

It reminds me of the use of the Boulton Paul Defiant units during the Battle of Britain on frontline squadron rosters - all two of them, Dowding knew that the idea wasn't the best for a fighter and that its performance was too low for frontline use, but the type was put in the firing line, it carried out standing patrols, intruder raids, intercepts against heavy escort fighter opposition, all the things it was not really suited for. Simply because Fighter Command needed fighters.
 
Last edited:
 
Just watched it, very good discussion!
 
FLYBOYJ said:
Just watched it, very good discussion!
Click to expand...

Me too and it is certainly enlightening. The pilots' view is perhaps not what is being painted on this forum though, being described as nice to fly with pleasant handling although all agree its performance was sluggish and that it was outdated by 1942, but it certainly doesn't appear to have been the terrible aeroplane it's being depicted as here. I do suspect that a little Midway-itis is creeping in to perceptions, as I suspected, and I stand by my assertion that it was at the wrong place at the wrong time at Midway - not to mention bad torpedoes.
 

I agree with you 100%. The Swordfish and probably the Albacore were /would be death traps in daylight operations in the Pacific, especially if carrying torpedoes.
 
SaparotRob said:
One of the pilots quoted mentions the actual speed of the TBD may have been 200 when it was new but by 1942 he could get it to 150 only by "going downhill". The pilot also said they knew it was obsolete by that time.
Click to expand...

In Defense of the Worst Aircraft of World War II - TBD-1 Devastator - YouTube

The PW R-1830-64 of the Devastator had only 900hp. The R-1830 soon reached 1100hp, 1200hp and finally 1350hp. I wonder what 1100hp or 1200hp would have done for the aircraft.
 
A good point but RCAF posted the Yorktown's Coral Sea action report. That should have raised eyebrows but then again if the TBD would have been held back from Midway, the outcome may have been way different![/QUOTE]

Indeed, if the TBDs hadn't flown, the Zeros wouldn't have been down low slaughtering them, and might have been available to stop the Dauntlesses up high. That would have altered things immensely.
 
Actually no, the TBD's contribution to the victory at Midway was the disruption of counterattack preparations of KdB, VT-8s demise happened a full hour before the SBD reign of terror on KdB started. See page 432 of "Shattered Sword" for debunking of this particular myth.
 


How long would it take the Japanese to recover, rearm, and refuel after taking down the torpedo planes? All of those things would be factors, no?
 
glennasher said:
How long would it take the Japanese to recover, rearm, and refuel after taking down the torpedo planes? All of those things would be factors, no?
Click to expand...
Yes those factors were. There's a great set of videos that deal exactly with that. They're by Montemayor. It's called "Midway from the Japanese perspective" or close to it. He shows how the uncoordinated attacks kept Admiral Nagumo from being able to re-arm and launch later strikes much better than I could describe it.
 
Last edited:
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
984
buffnut453
S
Spitfire vs. Dora mass battle
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
Snautzer01
Vickers Wellington vs. Warwick
Replies
6
Views
564
SaparotRob
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
4K
Bretoal2
B
Menu
Log in
Register