FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1942
1942 - 1234.PDF
5^4 FLIGHT JUNE IITH, 1942 STRIKING RESULTS The Fairey Albacore is a modern torpB|lo-carrying biplane, enables it to be accdhomodated on a cat Analysis of attack results over a long period indicates that the torpedo appears to have an immeasurably greater degree of^success than the bomber. These statistics, like all others, may have a misleading air, since the scale of air torpedo attack has not been nearly so great as the bomb attack; if the success has been higher, the oppor tunities for failure have not been so frequent. Neverthe less, a torpedo hit is mostly fatal, whilst only a low per centage of bombs can be likewise regarded. This would appear to have an important bearing on our future policy; it would, for instance, be revolutionary to have a large aircraft carrying, say^, four or more torpedoes. Nor has the enejwy been slow to learn this major lesson of the war. The Japanese exploited it with overwhelm ing success against the Prince of Wales and the Repulse. Recently, German land-based torpedo aircraft types have attacked our shipping with some success off Norway on the route to Russia. Italian aircraft have attacked our warships in the Western and Eastern Mediterranean. Fly ing low across the sea, in one attack they approached within 25 miles of Alexandria, fortunately dropping their tin fish far outside effective range before scudding away to distant safety. . Great as its widespread success has been, jris~due to the pioneers to recall that not always has this arm been in favour. Gunnery experts used to ridicule claims made by the advocates of the torpedo aircraft as a most formid able striking weapon. They calculated they could shoot down slow-flying aircraft as absolute "sitters," whilst being sure that the use of faster aircraft would result in (1) inaccurate running of the torpedo, because of the impact shock on meeting the water : (2) inaccurate aiming, for higher speed would much affect the pilot's judgment; 3) increase of casualties amonp the attackers, since the high speed would prevent s\j«ff turnaway and bring the attackers on top of the ship's pom-pom armament. With the courage of conviction the original band of torpedo aircraft experts maintained that their striking force, even if it faced loss, would be of all-important value : (a) for crippling the enemy at sea; and (b) for attacking the enemy ia. harbour if he refused to come to sea. It folding arrangement is interesting to note that both these aims were success fully achieved against the Italian Navy. When the campaigns in the Western Desert and Greece made some transport ships of greater value to the enemy than evga their escorting warships (for these could be dealt with by our surface craft in good time) then Fleet Air Arm torpedo aircraft were - sent to prevent those supplies getting through. / The tally of these attacks must now aggregate scores of ships. For example, one F.A.A. squadron in the Eastern Mediterranean sank six ships in seven days. Each time an enemy target has presented itself, attack has been made so that it has been the exception for any enemy convoy, or ship to reach Rommel's forces. Let a small enemy convoy ven ture off the coast, and off will go af torpedo aircraft attack as soon as range permits. Little impression is made on public opinion when it is announced, that our naval aircraft have sunk a tanker or two in convoy, but the fact is that these successes are of the highest consequence. To take an example, in the closing days of last year Fleet Air Arm aircraft attacked an Italian convoy with the result that one 8,000-ton tanker and one 5,000-ton tanker were sunk immediately, and another tanker of 5,000 tons left ablaze fcom stem to stern. A total loss ot 18,000 tons of tanj>£r shipping oi vital importance to Rommel's forces. Expressed in Gallons Now this does not sound much at first sight, for it is not commonly realised what this means in converted terms. But: — One gallon of 87 octane fuel weighs 7.3 lb. At this rate: — One 2,000-gallon tanker has about b\ tons of fuel. % It would be fair presumption that One 5,000-ton ship might carry 3,000 tons .of fuel. On this basis, to sink one 5,000-ton tanker is equivalent to depriving the enemy at once of at least 920,000 gallons of fuel, sufficient to fill about 450 field mobile tankers for aircraft and tanks, gffch of 2,000 gallons of fuel—or 2,000 of the 450-gallon variety. These are striking figures. For purposes of comparison, it may be noted that if our aircraft were to locate, saw 20 field fuei tankers of 450-gallons apiece, and by pressing home attack were to destroy each of those field tankers and its contents, then such an attack would rightly be regarded as a success—yet it would still require 100 such attacks to be equivalent to the sinking of a 5,000-toii ship carrying 3,000 tons of fuel. In the case of the three-ship tanker convoy quoted above, the figures rapidly tend to become astronomical. Of JtttT • 18,000 tons of shipping successfully attacked, it would (for reasons set down below) be a low estimate to claim n.ofcp tons of fuel, equivalent to some 3,400.000 gallons. In terms of flying time this quantity of fuel is seen to be great indeed Allow a modern i,oooh.p. aircraft engine a cruising consumption of 35 gallons an hour, a twin-engined
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
