Thoughts on replacing TBDs with more SBDs

[Jorge_Stanbury]

Has anybody replaced their USN TBDs and replaced them with Marine SBDs?

I can see some benefits, mainly:
- Better range
- Faster training as you can avoid torpedo skill in a time of critically poor pilot quality
- Avoidance of Mk 13 duds

This of course to be reversed once Avenger comes in line

thoughts?

gamey?

[rustysi]

I haven't gotten into the Allied side yet, but... Are there even enough SBD's to do this? What's their skill level? Would they be better off training? Not carrier trained yet, so higher op losses?

Definately a-historical. Gamey????

[Jorge_Stanbury]

Not Navy; but enough USMC

Carrier trained issue: correct, that will be the disadvantage; but so far I can tell that in my experiences adding Marines(adding, not replacing), the penalty is low

[AW1Steve]

I've done it. I've also replaced them with F4F's which I've found far more useful. I've on occasion "cross decked" (as the USN calls it) FAA torpedo bombers (generally when I've lost my brit CV's and are transporting the Brit squadrons home....but I've also done it simply to drive my opponent nuts too!). But by far , more fighters are far more useful. [:)]

[rustysi]

What I'm driving at is are there enough A/C, groups, available period? Are they/could they be better used elsewhere? Please tell me you're not looking to take the KB on early. I think that would be a mistake. Essentially I guess my point is, what's the point?

[Jorge_Stanbury]

The point is to neither go head-on against KB, nor to park the carriers in PH until mid 1943.

Hit and run, avoid fighting, but if by chance you get into the fight; to be at your best.

And yes, fighters also included; but as CV capacity is 90 planes; these can be added (no need to replace).
So we are talking: 2 fighter squadrons and 3 dive bombers

[AW1Steve]

Something else to consider is if you'd like to have some USMC squadrons completely CV trained. Some feel this isn't necessary , that carrier capable is fine , But I like to "spread the experience" around , and I like having extra fully trained USMC squadrons available. Extra dive bombers are great , but you never can bring too many fighters to the fight.

[Bullwinkle58]

I've sometimes had CVs with five fighter units.

[niceguy2005]

My first instinct, and I hope this is not taken to cause offense, but pulling the TBDs off feels a bit gamey. I suppose we do have the ability of hindsight and know how ineffective they were/will be.

Prior to switching to AE, I ran a number of war games testing the US CVs against various numbers of IJN CVs in Feb '42. The USN consistently held its own against an equal or even slightly higher numbers. That was with Lex still flying Buffs. I say leave 'em alone and let the navy boys fight.

I never initiated the operation, but I would have loved to. It was in support of fortifying Java island with a full Aussie division, plus a Bde, artillery, support and thousands of tons of supplies. Would love to have seen the expression on my opponents face when he suddenly found himself in a carrier battle in the Indian Ocean south of Java. [:D]

[Malagant]

I don't see how Allies switching around Carrier Air Wing composition is any more gamey than Japanese doing so....either by significant squadron size changes or switching around airframes.

From a pragmatic perspective, what can a TBD do that an SBD can't do better? What can a TBD do to warrant it taking limited hanger space away from a Wildcat or even Buffalo?

I've considered doing this in my first ongoing PBEM, and depending on how things develop intend to do so if I have any CVs left.

[JocMeister]

I usually fill out the CVs using extra USMC F4Fs in the first year.

[wdolson]

I'm not sure what the USN would have done if they had essentially run out of TBDs before the TBF was ready. The TBD was out of production long before the war and stocks were running low by the time of Midway. The USN only needed to fill out 5 VT squadrons in June of 1942. VT-2 was disbanded after the loss of the Lexington and VT-5 was replaced by VT-3 on the Yorktown for Midway. VT-4 and VT-7 on the Ranger and Wasp could have been stripped if need be, but both were operating below full strength in the Atlantic. TBD losses at Coral Sea put a big dent in the supply. If there had been some other battle that had destroyed a lot of TBDs before the TBF was ready in numbers.

Someone made a list of the fate of every single TBD airframe:
http://tbd_devastator.tripod.com/tbdpage.htm

Bill

[IdahoNYer]

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

The point is to neither go head-on against KB, nor to park the carriers in PH until mid 1943.

Hit and run, avoid fighting, but if by chance you get into the fight; to be at your best.

And yes, fighters also included; but as CV capacity is 90 planes; these can be added (no need to replace).
So we are talking: 2 fighter squadrons and 3 dive bombers

I keep my outdated TBDs on the decks. Maxed out with pilots, they train TB pilots and provide ASW coverage unless I think I'm in range of a good target. SDBs are a much better plane, but bombs don't do much against BBs - so having TBDs around can come in handy during raids if you spot BBs.

[Lokasenna]

I transfer to shore, and add at least 1 USMC F4F unit. I'd rather have 54 F4F/36 SBD than 36 F4F/54 SBD.

Besides that, with some jiggering, you can make sure you have plenty of F4F (whether -3, -3A, or -4), while your SBD pools are going to be low for quite some time.

[Jorge_Stanbury]

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

The point is to neither go head-on against KB, nor to park the carriers in PH until mid 1943.

Hit and run, avoid fighting, but if by chance you get into the fight; to be at your best.

And yes, fighters also included; but as CV capacity is 90 planes; these can be added (no need to replace).
So we are talking: 2 fighter squadrons and 3 dive bombers

I keep my outdated TBDs on the decks. Maxed out with pilots, they train TB pilots and provide ASW coverage unless I think I'm in range of a good target. SDBs are a much better plane, but bombs don't do much against BBs - so having TBDs around can come in handy during raids if you spot BBs.

True, but you don't need the planes on deck to train. they can do it on any base.

What is your experience with Mk 13 torpedoes?
do you know if they are affected (in game) with the reliability malus?
according to some web research, they were not unreliable as the submarine (Mk14) or destroyer (Mk15) versions. This according to Wikipedia [8|] due to: larger diameter, lesser mass, lesser negative buoyancy, slower running speed and the lack of a magnetic influence feature in its Mark IV exploder

I am still debating it myself; I would certainly prefer that my carriers are not within 4-hexes range of a BB or even a cruiser TF. And Japanese CV TFs will try to fight at longer ranges to maximize their long range advantage. Plus any bomber type can do ASW

[EHansen]

disregard

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

The point is to neither go head-on against KB, nor to park the carriers in PH until mid 1943.

Hit and run, avoid fighting, but if by chance you get into the fight; to be at your best.

And yes, fighters also included; but as CV capacity is 90 planes; these can be added (no need to replace).
So we are talking: 2 fighter squadrons and 3 dive bombers

I keep my outdated TBDs on the decks. Maxed out with pilots, they train TB pilots and provide ASW coverage unless I think I'm in range of a good target. SDBs are a much better plane, but bombs don't do much against BBs - so having TBDs around can come in handy during raids if you spot BBs.

True, but you don't need the planes on deck to train. they can do it on any base.

What is your experience with Mk 13 torpedoes?
do you know if they are affected (in game) with the reliability malus?
according to some web research, they were not unreliable as the submarine (Mk14) or destroyer (Mk15) versions. This according to Wikipedia [8|] due to: larger diameter, lesser mass, lesser negative buoyancy, slower running speed and the lack of a magnetic influence feature in its Mark IV exploder

I am still debating it myself; I would certainly prefer that my carriers are not within 4-hexes range of a BB or even a cruiser TF. And Japanese CV TFs will try to fight at longer ranges to maximize their long range advantage. Plus any bomber type can do ASW

You could look in the editor to see if they are affected by the torpedo duds. I don't recall off the top of my head, but I do know that the dud reduction works like this:

1/1/43 - 20% reduction in dud rate
9/1/43 - all torpedo devices with dud rate higher than 20% are set to 20% (or maybe it's all devices with 20% or greater set down to 10%?)

[msieving1]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer




I keep my outdated TBDs on the decks. Maxed out with pilots, they train TB pilots and provide ASW coverage unless I think I'm in range of a good target. SDBs are a much better plane, but bombs don't do much against BBs - so having TBDs around can come in handy during raids if you spot BBs.

True, but you don't need the planes on deck to train. they can do it on any base.

What is your experience with Mk 13 torpedoes?
do you know if they are affected (in game) with the reliability malus?
according to some web research, they were not unreliable as the submarine (Mk14) or destroyer (Mk15) versions. This according to Wikipedia [8|] due to: larger diameter, lesser mass, lesser negative buoyancy, slower running speed and the lack of a magnetic influence feature in its Mark IV exploder

I am still debating it myself; I would certainly prefer that my carriers are not within 4-hexes range of a BB or even a cruiser TF. And Japanese CV TFs will try to fight at longer ranges to maximize their long range advantage. Plus any bomber type can do ASW

You could look in the editor to see if they are affected by the torpedo duds. I don't recall off the top of my head, but I do know that the dud reduction works like this:

1/1/43 - 20% reduction in dud rate
9/1/43 - all torpedo devices with dud rate higher than 20% are set to 20% (or maybe it's all devices with 20% or greater set down to 10%?)

The Mk 13 torpedo has a 50% dud rate in the game. It did not have the same problems as the Mk 14 and Mk 15, but it had problems all its own. In particular, if launched at too high a speed or too high an altitude, it would run erratically or simply break up.