Was a four engine torpedo bomber ever considered?

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

SaparotRob said:
The 225 slant six was magnificent.
Click to expand...

Dad had a 73 Dart Sport 6-cyl, four on the floor, carpet on the door. 1979, living in Paso Robles.

We would go up to Ft Hunter-Liggett on weekends and fill the trunk up with firewood, one of the side-bennies he had from his job there -- plenty of free oak. I got to see parked Sherman tanks as an added bonus. (Using google image to recheck, I think they were Easy-8s, they had the muzzle brake and beefy front). Another bonus, we'd sometimes come home down PCH, and that was sure pretty.

But good lord, I hated splitting the wood when we got home.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't a four engined aircraft be easy to hit with flak?

How abut the Hs293? Not a torpedo, but definitely dropped by multi-engined aircraft. The He177 should have been four engined.
 
Howard Gibson said:
The He177 should have been four engined.
Click to expand...
It was.

You could declutch one engine in each pair, and fly (slowly) on the remaining two engines.

Not sure how this worked in practice, shared oil supply/shared coolant?
restarting cold engines (1/2 to 1 hour low speed cruise) might have been 'exciting' for the crew. You had large started motors but bringing the cold engines up to operating temperatures/pressures quickly might have required 'finesse"
 
SaparotRob said:
I took H.G.'s statement to mean four separate nacelles, as intended by all that is Holy, praise be B-17.
Click to expand...
He177s were sort of four-engined. Vickers Warwicks had only two engines, but were intended as heavy bombers, and would had similar manoeuverability when engaged by anti-aircraft fire.

The original post was about four engined aircraft. You could conceivably design a heavy torpedo bomber around a single Pratt & Whitney R-4360. You could have the same performance and wingspan as a B-17, and the same inability to dodge flak.
 
Touché.
 
The six engined bomber concept was part of "Project Z", which was the Japanese version of the German's "Amerikabomber" program.

One of the proposals, Nakajima's G5N, was designed to carry two torpedoes.

Of the three proposals, only Nakajima's G10N was intended to have six engines.
 
I have another thought about this discussion.

How fast can you fly and successfully drop a torpedo? The advantages of speed are obvious. If your torpedo bomber cannot exceed 200mph as it approaches a ship, the superior speed of potential torpedo planes like Fw190s and Blackburn Firebrands are of no use. The defense firepower of a B-17 sized aircraft might be an advantage. You still have to avoid anti-aircraft on your ship.

Could a B-17 carry a torpedo?
 
How about a P-61 with all that forward firepower?
 
Alan Stevens said:
How about a P-61 with all that forward firepower?
Click to expand...
Depends on the torpedo.
Some torpedoes had to be aimed ahead of of the target ship by aiming the aircraft ahead of the target ship in which case fixed gun armament is useless.
Some torpedoes could be aimed off, torpedo gyro could be set to different course than the plane was flying.
Fixed guns are now somewhat more useful.
Except thar the idea is to drop the torpedo from 600-1000 yards away from the ship and then perform evasive action. Not do a strafing run right over the ship with everything bigger than a pistol firing at your belly.
Granted attacking fast warships requires a different attack pattern than attacking slow merchant ships.
 
Last edited:
The next F-version was the P-38F-1-LO (Model 222-60-15), which differed from the P-38F-LO in being modified after delivery to carry a pair of drop tanks or a pair of 1000-lb bombs under the wing center sections. Each rack could also carry a Smoke Curtain Installation or a 22-inch torpedo. This version had SCR-525 and SCR-522 radio. 149 of the P-38F-1-LO version were built.
 
We got acoustic guided torpedos by the end of WW2, imagine a fleet of b-17s dropping 4 each from altitude or something and they used a drogue chute, like what happens with modern asw aircraft.

They were too slow to hit any real warship, but they would easily break a formation in a convoy.
 
The P-61 will need to yaw towards the target ship after launching its torpedo. Until then, the upper turret will do its best to keep the enemy gunners down. Though it must be locked against shooting off the props?
 
Kenny's B-17s of the 5th AF were highly successful with their low-level skip bombing attacks.

Torpedoes could have been deployed in the same fashion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Were any British non-RR ww2-era aeroengines considered for land use?
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
3K
MiTasol
1939 Tactical Bomber
2 3
Replies
41
Views
4K
GrauGeist
A
What if - Four-Power Pact 1933 is confirmed
Replies
3
Views
827
Zmauky
Z
[ww2] Ever smaller rockets for air fighting?
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
bf109xxl
Fairey 2-engined bomber - any worth in that?
Replies
11
Views
1K
nuuumannn
Menu
Log in
Register