Swordfish vs Devastator

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

For a bit of context the magazine load for the Essex in 1942 is given as
100lb gp bomb........504
500lb GP bomb........296
1000lb GP bomb.....146
1000lb SAP bomb...129
1000lb AP bomb......110
1600lb AP bomb.........19
2000lb GP bomb........19
325lb DB.......................296
100lb incendiary........296
torpedoes ....................36

The Bennington in 1944 is credited with 50 torpedoes.

the List for the Lexington in 1936 was
100lb gp bomb........804
500lb GP bomb....... 391
1000lb GP bomb.....240
torpedoes ....................36
 
fubar57 said:
Warpaint has the Albacore at 161 mph at 4000 ft but doesn't show whether clean or loaded.
Click to expand...

That was with a Taurus II loaded with 6 x 250lb bombs, IIRC. Full speed clean was 172mph, again with a Taurus II according to Boscombe Down testing. Full speed with a Taurus XII would be 5-10mph faster.
 
The Albacore and Swordfish would routinely return with their torpedo - the only times they did not land on the carrier with the torpedo was in extreme sea states where it would be too dangerous. I do not know how common it was for the Devastator to land on the carrier with a torpedo (I do not think there were enough opportunities to get a count), but by early-1944 the SOP for the Avenger (in US service) was to dump the torpedo before attempting to land on board. This was due to multiple incidents where the torpedo came loose during the landing and skittering across the deck, causing damage to the landing aircraft and sometimes causing damage to other aircraft and deck crew. There was at least one instance where the pilot forgot to safe the torpedo before dumping it and ended up torpedoing a friendly ship.
 
Never confirmed this, but I once heard a speed of 90 mph was what the Swordfish used during an attack.
Seems agonizingly slow, if you ask me, but we're talking about 75-80 years ago, so maybe that wasn't considered so bad back then.
 
Elvis said:
Never confirmed this, but I once heard a speed of 90 mph was what the Swordfish used during an attack.
Seems agonizingly slow, if you ask me, but we're talking about 75-80 years ago, so maybe that wasn't considered so bad back then.
Click to expand...
Seems slow now. 90 mph is 78 knots. Imagine flying towards your target into a 20 knot headwind, you're now a 58 knot (1,957 yards per min), level flying target for every AA gunner. If you begin your torpedo run at 2,000 yards and drop at 500 yards, you're a sitting duck for about 45 seconds.
 
Last edited:
Admiral Beez said:
Had been the other way round, and all the Zeros were at HA beating the hell out of the SBDs and thus not noticing the approaching TBDs at LA, the Devastators may have scored crippling hits. The AA on IJN was apparently rubbish.
Click to expand...

That's just another way of describing the same problem...that the IJN lacked adequate fighter direction. That still doesn't make the Devastator an effective weapons platform.

I also highly doubt that crippling hits would have been achieved given the limitations of the USN's torpedo at the time.
 
Elvis said:
Never confirmed this, but I once heard a speed of 90 mph was what the Swordfish used during an attack.
Seems agonizingly slow, if you ask me, but we're talking about 75-80 years ago, so maybe that wasn't considered so bad back then.
Click to expand...
Drop speeds varied but 90 knots was common with a Swordfish but max drop speeds were ~120 knots, IIRC, in 1939/41. By 1942 drop speeds on RN aerial torpedoes increased to ~150 knots.
 
RCAFson said:
Drop speeds varied but 90 knots was common with a Swordfish but max drop speeds were ~120 knots, IIRC, in 1939/41. By 1942 drop speeds on RN aerial torpedoes increased to ~150 knots.
Click to expand...
KNOTS!!...maybe that's what it was, and not mph.
90 kts is almost 104 mph, so that's a little faster.
From what I'm learning here, it seems the torpedoes had wood shrouds over the nose and tail that helped protect and stabilize the torpedo in the air. They sheared off upon impact, but they also slowed the torpedo slightly and that helped them home in on the target.
I guess it was this that allowed launch speeds to increase.
 
buffnut453 said:
That's just another way of describing the same problem...that the IJN lacked adequate fighter direction. That still doesn't make the Devastator an effective weapons platform.
Click to expand...
Yes, we need to overlook the sh#tty torpedoes. With the same torpedoes, even if we replace the Devastators with A-1 Skyraiders the damage would be the same. Could Swordfish or Albacore have done better than the Devastator at Midway?
 
Admiral Beez said:
Yes, we need to overlook the sh#tty torpedoes. With the same torpedoes, even if we replace the Devastators with A-1 Skyraiders the damage would be the same. Could Swordfish or Albacore have done better than the Devastator at Midway?
Click to expand...

I think the Swordfish could have done better. By the summer of 1942, Swordfish had radar and the crews were well-practiced operating at night. The RN's torpedoes also had a much better chance of actually causing damage on an enemy's ships. Given all of these factors, I suspect the IJN would have a really hard time countering the Swordfish threat.
 
buffnut453 said:
I think the Swordfish could have done better. By the summer of 1942, Swordfish had radar and the crews were well-practiced operating at night.
Click to expand...
No, I mean on that same attack, same daylight conditions. At Midway, a total of 41 Devastators were launched from USS Hornet, Enterprise and Yorktown to attack the Japanese fleet - only six Devastators returned. Swap out each of these 41 Devastator for a torpedo-armed Swordfish, do any survive to launch their torpedoes and return?

And forget about torpedo quality, the Devastators at Midway didn't suffer from torpedo failure, because none of them managed to strike their targets.
 
Last edited:
Admiral Beez said:
No, I mean on that same attack, same daylight conditions. Swap out each Devastator for a Swordfish, do any survive to launch and return?
Click to expand...

You can replace the Devastator with any other torpedo type--Swordfish, Avenger etc.--and you'll get broadly similar results as happened at Midway. The only difference would be the amount of punishment a particular airframe could take.

I have to ask, though, what's the point of taking an airframe with capabilities that the Devastator didn't have, and then constraining its use by employing it in the same daylight conditions as the Devastators? No operational user would deliberately ignore a platform's key strengths and operate it at a tactical disadvantage. If the USN had a radar-equipped torpedo aircraft in June 1942, surely they'd have used it at night to increase the odds of success...or am I missing something?
 
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
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
Spitfire vs Me-109
Replies
3
Views
1K
PAT303
P
Menu
Log in
Register