Worst aircraft of WW2?

Thorlifter
Agree that the Ba 88 is a shocker
Can you explain why the Lerwick was doomed from the start? Saro had experience with previous seaplanes and continued with that doomed type of plane after the war leading up to the Princess. The general layout of the Lerwick is similar to the Grumman Widgeon/Goose etc and examples of these continue to fly now. The Lerwick could have been a useful type that reduced the demand for the Catalina but the design team stuffed it up and it only made production because of the pressures of the war.

Lightning Guy said:

It is true that the TBF and Marauder (both of which made torpedo runs at Midway) were both severly mauled.

Claiming that the TBD was one of the best torpedo bombers in the world at the time isn't saying much. What else was in the running? The Stingbag, the Abalcore, the B5N. That's about it.

And the TBD was that bad. Consider that clean it's top speed was a mere 206mph. When carrying a torp it was hard pressed to make 125mph.

Click to expand...

The TBD was a fine a/c that was obsolete at the beginning of the war. In addition it was used in contested skies as were the TBF's and Marauders.

Bachem Ba 349 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

FLYBOYJ said:

Actually it was used properly. It was state of the art in 1937, obsolete in 1942. With fighter escort it "might" have done better at Midway. It did serve in Coral Sea. Again one must look at the aircraft, whether it met its design criteria, and whether it was obsolete when facing an onslaught.

Click to expand...

Nah..

They should have had an escort. The attack was uncoordinated so they were not used properly...

cimmee said:

Nah..

They should have had an escort. The attack was uncoordinated so they were not used properly...

Click to expand...

Nah.....

The "uncoordinated attack" had NOTHING to do with the way the aircraft operated. It did what it was supposed to do but was put in a time and place where its obsolescence showed.

With or without an escort the TBD was doomed to be taken out of service, end of story.

FLYBOYJ said:

Nah.....

The "uncoordinated attack" had NOTHING to do with the way the aircraft operated. It did what it was supposed to do but was put in a time and place where its obsolescence showed.

With or without an escort the TBD was doomed to be taken out of service, end of story.

Click to expand...

No..

The "Mosquito Raids" and "Coral Sea" show the TBD to be a fine aircraft if obsolete.

The "Stringbag" was even further down the obsolescence scale and performed admirably. Taranto?

Contested skies made all of the difference not the a/c themselves.

cimmee said:

No..

The "Mosquito Raids" and "Coral Sea" show the TBD to be a fine aircraft if obsolete.

The "Stringbag" was even further down the obsolescence scale and performed admirably. Taranto?

Contested skies made all of the difference not the a/c themselves.

Click to expand...

The Mosquito Raids and Coral Sea did not have the aircraft operating at the extent of its design limits. The fighter opposition played into the fray but compare to what replaced it the TBD (as well as torpedo bombing) was obsolete.

The Stringbag? Performed with honor in many battles but had been placed in the same situation as the TBD, it too would had been shot to pieces. I think all connected with the aircraft that a bit of luck had to play with much of its success.

Every time a TBD or Swordfish took off it was at it's design limits! They were both fine a/c that performed well if used properly..

cimmee said:

Every time a TBD or Swordfish took off it was at it's design limits! They were both fine a/c that performed well if used properly..

Click to expand...

And both obsolete and neither should be considered "worse aircraft of WW2." I think we've been saying the same thing all along.

You're shifting the goal posts.

TBD's were lost in great numbers at Midway due to an improper mission profile.

cimmee said:

You're shifting the goal posts.

TBD's were lost in great numbers at Midway due to an improper mission profile.

Click to expand...

So tell us, what "would have" been the correct mission profile for the TBD at Midway to properly perform its mission?

FLYBOYJ said:

So tell us, what "would have" been the correct mission profile for the TBD at Midway to properly perform its mission?

Click to expand...

Tie balloons onto the torps and float them towards the Japanese fleet while the TBD pilots sensibly stayed in the wardroom and drank cocoa?

It was just a suggestion....

buffnut453 said:

Tie balloons onto the torps and float them towards the Japanese fleet while the TBD pilots sensibly stayed in the wardroom and drank cocoa?

It was just a suggestion....

Click to expand...

cimmee said:

You're shifting the goal posts.

TBD's were lost in great numbers at Midway due to an improper mission profile.

Click to expand...

TBDs were lost in great numbers at Midway because they were doing exactly what they were designed to do, approach an enemy ship straight and level and release thier torpedo at a speed of approx. 115 miles an hour...

The problem here is, that the TBD's design and application was outdated by almost a decade. The Japanese defenders tore them apart because of the light armor, insufficient defensive armament and low speeds, both in ingress and egress, and while on target.

If you're referring to the haphazard way they were deployed at Midway, that's the way it happens in battle. Nothing is ever perfect, and if it is, then there's a 99.9% chance it's an ambush...

Adm. Spruance did not have time to draw up a complete order of battle, he was outnumbered and did not have the luxury of time. So in went the TBDs on thier own by a twist of fate. They did thier job, much like the Charge of the Light Brigade and while they may not have dealt a serious blow against the IJN fleet, their attack halted the crucial refueling arming of the Japanese aircraft and created major confusion among the carriers, leaving them wide open for attack by the SBDs, who were soon to attack.

Bottom line, is that they performed as designed.

I have to raise issue with a number of comments regarding the TBD. It was a failure as much due to the ordinance it was carrying as any shortcomings in the aircraft design.

Its interesting to compare the TBD with its nearest enemy equivalent, the B5N. Both were unarmoured and inadedquately armed defensively. Ignoring manouverability , the maximum level speeds are not all that different...the TBD had a max level speed of 206 mph at 8000 ft, and a rate of climb of 720 ft/min, a service ceiling of 19200 ft and a range with bombload of 416 miles. The TBD was developed in from 1934-37

The B5N max level speed was 230 mph @ 9850ft, and a cruising speed of 164 mph. It had a rate of climb just over 1000 ft per min up to 10000 feet. Its service ceiling was 25200 ft and a range of about 700 miles. The B5N was developed at the same time, roughly as the TBD

The Devastator is generally judged a failure, whereas the Kate is considered a success. Though the Kate does enjoy a performance advantage, it is not that great, so why did the TBD fare so badly?

My opinion is that the primary failure was due to the ordinance being carried. It is interesting to note, that the successor to the TBD, the TBF, though much more survivable, did not enjoy much greater success, a/c for a/c, than its predecessor. Most of the major Japanese ship losses were due to bombs rather than torpedoes.

So lets compare the torpedo ordinance of each combatant, and see if there is any big difference....I am going to look at torpedoes that might be considered typical, rat6her than go through all the types in service.....

The principal types equipping the USN torpedo sqadrons in 1942, required a launch speed of no more than 110 knots, and a drop height not exceeding 50 feet. It had a theoretical range of 5800m, but in reality drop ranges were about 1000m . sea speed was just over 30 knots. For all this effort, the ordinance could deliver 401lbs of of TNT to the target, and was fitted with an unreliable exploder.

By comparison, the Japanese aerial torpedoes of 1942, a launch speed up to 260kts, and a max drop height of 250m. It had a theoretical range of 8000m, and a practical launch range of 2200m, and at that range could travel at 45 kts. It had an explosive charge of 530lb. Not sure if it was torpex.

As can be seen the differences in aircraft performance, are significant, but not crucially so. Not so with the ordinance....the Japanese lead in torpedoes was commanding, and in 1942 decisve. Thats the main reason why the kate was relatively successful, whereas the TBD was a failure

Excellent point, parsifal

Early U.S. torpedoes had a terrible performance record, both airborn and ship-launched. There were countless cases were a potentially decisive hit failed due to a "dud" (non-detonation or running lower than set depth) or the submariner's nightmare were it would circle back to it's point of launch.

Despite my earlier, highly flippant, post, I agree with the comments above. The TBD was another of those mid/late '30s designs which lacked the performance under combat conditions. That the aircraft's weapon performed so badly is simply shocking. Everyone in the military accepts that they may have to put their life on the line to defend their country, but flying the TBD into combat with little chance of causing any damage at all to the adversary is an appalling waste. The TBD is a long way from being the worst aircraft of WWII. It's just another of those types which held the limelight very briefly and for all the wrong reasons.

Great post guys - so in the end it was obsolete, as originally stated. Even with the "the correct mission profile for the TBD at Midway" the plane was a sitting duck.

It would seem that any torpedo bomber using the early MK 13 torpedo in a "proper mission profile" would be a sitting duck.
Proper mission profile being the correct target approach and torpedo drop requirements for best performance of the torpedo. A better performing aircraft could reach and escape the strike area at higher speeds or better evasive capability but if you have to slow to 110knots at sea level (+50 ft) with fighters in the area you are in trouble no matter what you are flying. In fact some aircraft might be in worse shape than the TBD.
Imagine the B-26 at 110kts, 50ft over the water at 1000yds from a column of enemy ships. The B-26 had a best approach landing speed at 26,000lbs of 125kts. It would practically be at stall, even gunning the engines at the instant the torpedo drops is going to require a number of seconds for the plane to build speed before any but the gentlest of maneuvers are performed, like turning away from the ships with their AA guns.
The torpedoes also required a certain amount of time in straight and level flight BEFORE dropping in order to be effective.
The TBD's greatest failing at Midway was a lack of escort fighters, which is hardly the fault of the TBD.

FLYBOYJ said:

So tell us, what "would have" been the correct mission profile for the TBD at Midway to properly perform its mission?

Click to expand...

Factoring them in "late" or escorted. Everyone arriving on time... same time.. Or not launching them.