Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
In hindsight yes, but when the Avenger was ordered torpedo bombing was still very much thought to be a viable form of attack. Perhaps even over dive bombing as the prevailing US Navy aviation saying "Want to damage a ship bomb it, want to sink a ship torpedo it" as I remember reading in "First Team".
Having torpedoes that explode is a big help.
The Mark 13 was designed specifically for aircraft and was actually a good performer, unlike the ship-born Mark 14 and Mark 15 types.
Might also be interesting to know that PT boats used the Mark 13 type, too.
a total of 156 Mark 13 Mod 0 torpedoes were produced which was enough to provide two loads for each of the four 18-plane torpedo squadrons assigned to the pre-war carrier fleet plus a dozen spares. Mod 0 differed from later mods by having a rail-type tail in which the propellers were in front of the rudders. This was the only US torpedo to ever have this feature. The Newport Torpedo Station was unhappy with arrangement for reasons unknown and the Mod 1 entered service in 1940 with a conventional propeller arrangement, as can be seen in the photographs above. Unfortunately and unlike the Mod 0, the Mod 1 proved to be an unreliable weapon, with only one of ten torpedoes dropped by VT-6 during an exercise in July 1941 having a hot, straight and normal run. Of the others, four sank and could not be recovered while the other five experienced erratic runs.
These problems continued into the early war years, with a mid-1943 analysis of 105 torpedoes dropped at speeds in excess of 150 knots found that 36 percent ran cold (did not start), 20 percent sank, 20 percent had poor deflection performance, 18 percent gave unsatisfactory depth performance, 2 percent ran on the surface and only 31 percent gave a satisfactory run. The total exceeds 100 percent as many torpedoes had more than one defect. The early models were further handicapped by the need to drop them low and slow - typically 50 feet (15 m) and 110 knots - which made the torpedo planes carrying them vulnerable to attack.
These problems were greatly reduced by the latter years of the war. Torpedoes had fin stabilizers, nose drag rings and tail shroud rings added, all of which worked to slow the torpedo after it was dropped so that it struck the water nose-first and at an acceptable speed. These improved the drop characteristics such that the recommended aircraft maximum launch parameters were increased to a height of 2,400 feet (730 m) and a speed of 410 knots.
USA Torpedoes of World War II
Would Grumman's resources have been better spent designing and manufacturing the replacement for the SBD Dauntless?
Curtiss did not handle the SB2C Helldiver project well.
Grumman began development of the Avenger two years later that Curtiss began the Helldiver, yet the Avenger entered service sooner.
And divebombers, at least in US service, had eclipsed torpedo bombers.
Probably not stressed for the HIGH "G" pull out.
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/structure-weight-data-drag-analysis-42716.html
Second page. G Factor for the Tarpon (Avenger) not given but Barracuda was 9, Spitfire IX was 10.0, Vultee Vengence was 13.5.
How steep do you want to dive and how hard do you want to pull out (and how many times, lots of airplanes might do it 2-3 times, doing a dive bomber pull out in a plane that has done 30-40 (training) and has 3-400hours and 50-80 carrier landings on the airframe??)
The trouble with hindsight is that does not take into account the
situation the US Navy was in 1939.
With hindsight, they could.Waiting for a better plane powered by the R-2800 may not have been a luxury they could afford.
With hindsight, they could and did survive (Thach weave etc.)In 1939-41 the idea that a torpedo bomber or dive bomber could survive without a rear gunner was a totally unproven concept.
BTW, this was ordered 9 months before the Skyraider.
If anything, employing the "Weave" would slow them down even more......The Thach weave was used by fighter elements. I am not so sure how it would have worked for torpedo bombers. Granted the defensive guns didn't work all that well either but pairs of torpedo bombers weaving back and forth at torpedo bomber speeds and with light forward firing armament are going to have a hard time taking out attacking fighters.