Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Getting a bit off topic and out of theater but I am surprised that the Italian human torpedo attack by three crews in Alexandria harbor in 1941 is not mentioned in either of these two threads. I suppose it can be argued that they were not exactly torpedoes but mini subs with mines but for strategic value this has to be rated as one of the most successful torpedo attacks of the war. It also put to rest that the Italians were incompetent and less dedicated warriors as this attack was very well planned and took some brass balls for the six men involved to pull off.

It can be argued that the results of this raid were just as critical as the British attack on Taranto.

Warspite1

I think the word "aerial" is key here [;)]

I agree though, the results of the attack were impressive and the bravery rightfully recognised - sadly for the Italians the attack was probably 12 months too late to be of any strategic value.

But then again, if we are measuring more than just ship damage, then the PH raid must be seen as the WORST ever - after all look what the Japanese stirred up by carrying it out. [;)]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Getting a bit off topic and out of theater but I am surprised that the Italian human torpedo attack by three crews in Alexandria harbor in 1941 is not mentioned in either of these two threads. I suppose it can be argued that they were not exactly torpedoes but mini subs with mines but for strategic value this has to be rated as one of the most successful torpedo attacks of the war. It also put to rest that the Italians were incompetent and less dedicated warriors as this attack was very well planned and took some brass balls for the six men involved to pull off.

It can be argued that the results of this raid were just as critical as the British attack on Taranto.

Warspite1

I think the word "aerial" is key here [;)]

I agree though, the results of the attack were impressive and the bravery rightfully recognised - sadly for the Italians the attack was probably 12 months too late to be of any strategic value.

But then again, if we are measuring more than just ship damage, then the PH raid must be seen as the WORST ever - after all look what the Japanese stirred up by carrying it out. [;)]

warspite1

Further to the above, the raid would probably have been better remembered if the RM had been able to take advantage of the opportunity that the attack opened up.

Sadly (for the Italians) they singly failed to do this - the 2nd Naval Battle of Sirte kind of summed up the RM's inadequacies in that department.

Edit: Spelling

From looking through all of the more publicized attacks, most successful attacks were more luck than skill. The hit on the Bismark, the hit on the PoW, were both more due to luck than skill according to the parties attacking the targets. Taranto was due to some intense recon prior to the attack, as was Pearl Harbor & even the Gneisenau. Musashi was just mobbed. So far, the only truly skilled effective attack would be the Battle of Rennell Island, an attack in open water on undamaged ships with a 20% success rate.

I need to look up Coral Sea, & see about the numbers against a capital ship by the best of the IJN.

<edit>

So, Coral Sea 18 Kate's attacked with 4 on Yorktown, and 14 on Lex scoring 2 on Lex. This attack occurred before the dive bombers attacked, so these 2 carriers were undamaged prior to the torpedo attack. Success rate 10-18% depending on how you do the numbers.

Interesting so far. Still looking though.

There is a reason why the SM.79 Sparviero arguably was the best torpedo bomber of WWII.&nbsp; Far superior to the Kate or any other Axis bomber equipped with torpedoes.&nbsp; But that acknowledgement would require the stereotypes of the Italian armed forces to be placed in the waste paper bin which is their correct filing location.
&nbsp;
The Italians had the best aerial torpedoes of WWII period.&nbsp; Even the Germans with their racial prejudices had to eventually swallow their pride and acquire Italian aerial torpedoes.&nbsp; It is very hard, verging on impossible, to argue that using second best hardware resulted in absolute best outcomes.
&nbsp;
Alfred

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

From looking through all of the more publicized attacks, most successful attacks were more luck than skill. The hit on the Bismark, the hit on the PoW, were both more due to luck than skill according to the parties attacking the targets. Taranto was due to some intense recon prior to the attack, as was Pearl Harbor & even the Gneisenau. Musashi was just mobbed. So far, the only truly skilled effective attack would be the Battle of Rennell Island, an attack in open water on undamaged ships with a 20% success rate.

I need to look up Coral Sea, & see about the numbers against a capital ship by the best of the IJN.

I respectfully disagree with your observations about 'the only skilled attack'. Hitting ANY moving ship with a torpedo is tough and requires skill. Hell, hitting a stationary target with a torpedo takes a skill that I can't even imagine.

If you're looking at other examples, consider Hiryu's second counterattack against a repaired Yorktown. 10 B5N2s scoring 2 hits and crippling the carrier for a second time. IIRC, the flight leader, Tomonaga was killed during this attack (he missed).

That's not only an awe-inspiring example of skill, but of heroism.

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

From looking through all of the more publicized attacks, most successful attacks were more luck than skill. The hit on the Bismark, the hit on the PoW, were both more due to luck than skill according to the parties attacking the targets. Taranto was due to some intense recon prior to the attack, as was Pearl Harbor & even the Gneisenau. Musashi was just mobbed. So far, the only truly skilled effective attack would be the Battle of Rennell Island, an attack in open water on undamaged ships with a 20% success rate.

I need to look up Coral Sea, & see about the numbers against a capital ship by the best of the IJN.

I respectfully disagree with your observations about 'the only skilled attack'. Hitting ANY moving ship with a torpedo is tough and requires skill. Hell, hitting a stationary target with a torpedo takes a skill that I can't even imagine.

If you're looking at other examples, consider Hiryu's second counterattack against a repaired Yorktown. 10 B5N2s scoring 2 hits and crippling the carrier for a second time. IIRC, the flight leader, Tomonaga was killed during this attack (he missed).

That's not only an awe-inspiring example of skill, but of heroism.

True, but York was damaged, and had at least one boiler out. She was only making at best 22 knots at the time the Kate's came in. What I think I am seeing is torpedo bombers, while deadly, were used to be the coup de grace on ships damaged by other means. They were never meant to be ship killers in and of themselves.

BTW, here's a neat pic of the Akagi I have never seen before...

And one of the Hiryu, just before she went down

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

From looking through all of the more publicized attacks, most successful attacks were more luck than skill. The hit on the Bismark, the hit on the PoW, were both more due to luck than skill according to the parties attacking the targets. Taranto was due to some intense recon prior to the attack, as was Pearl Harbor & even the Gneisenau. Musashi was just mobbed. So far, the only truly skilled effective attack would be the Battle of Rennell Island, an attack in open water on undamaged ships with a 20% success rate.

I need to look up Coral Sea, & see about the numbers against a capital ship by the best of the IJN.

I respectfully disagree with your observations about 'the only skilled attack'. Hitting ANY moving ship with a torpedo is tough and requires skill. Hell, hitting a stationary target with a torpedo takes a skill that I can't even imagine.

If you're looking at other examples, consider Hiryu's second counterattack against a repaired Yorktown. 10 B5N2s scoring 2 hits and crippling the carrier for a second time. IIRC, the flight leader, Tomonaga was killed during this attack (he missed).

That's not only an awe-inspiring example of skill, but of heroism.

warspite1

+1 I would say that hitting (using the examples you gave) PoW and Bismarck was not luck. The skill was hitting them at all. Yes there was the luck element with both ships in terms of where they were hit and what that meant for survivability, but the attacks were executed by pilots exhibiting both bravery AND skill.

Hitting a still target = skill, hitting a moving target = even more skill, hitting a moving target while a whole lot of skillful people are trying to shoot your azz out from under you, well you know.

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
I respectfully disagree with your observations about 'the only skilled attack'. Hitting ANY moving ship with a torpedo is tough and requires skill. Hell, hitting a stationary target with a torpedo takes a skill that I can't even imagine.

If you're looking at other examples, consider Hiryu's second counterattack against a repaired Yorktown. 10 B5N2s scoring 2 hits and crippling the carrier for a second time. IIRC, the flight leader, Tomonaga was killed during this attack (he missed).

That's not only an awe-inspiring example of skill, but of heroism.

Hard or not it was pretty dangerous attacking against task forces as torpedo bomber pilot in some cases you get better chances to survive alive by playing couple rounds of russian roulette with revolver than as torpedo bomber pilot. [:)]

ORIGINAL: Jakerson

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
I respectfully disagree with your observations about 'the only skilled attack'. Hitting ANY moving ship with a torpedo is tough and requires skill. Hell, hitting a stationary target with a torpedo takes a skill that I can't even imagine.

If you're looking at other examples, consider Hiryu's second counterattack against a repaired Yorktown. 10 B5N2s scoring 2 hits and crippling the carrier for a second time. IIRC, the flight leader, Tomonaga was killed during this attack (he missed).

That's not only an awe-inspiring example of skill, but of heroism.

Hard or not it was pretty dangerous attacking against task forces as torpedo bomber pilot in some cases you get better chances to survive alive by playing couple rounds of russian roulette with revolver than as torpedo bomber pilot. [:)]

warspite1

Here is the Wiki entry for Eugene Esmonde V.C.

The courage of the gallant Swordfish crews was particularly noted by friend and foe alike. Admiral Bertram Ramsay later wrote, "In my opinion the gallant sortie of these six Swordfish aircraft constitutes one of the finest exhibitions of self-sacrifice and devotion to duty the war had ever witnessed", while Admiral Otto Ciliax in the Scharnhorst described "The mothball attack of a handful of ancient planes, piloted by men whose bravery surpasses any other action by either side that day". As he watched the smoking wrecks of the Swordfish falling into the sea, Captain Hoffmann of the Scharnhorst exclaimed, "Poor fellows, they are so very slow, it is nothing but suicide for them to fly against these big ships". Willhelm Wolf aboard the Scharnhorst wrote, "What an heroic stage for them to meet their end! Behind them their homeland, which they had just left with their hearts steeled to their purpose, still in view".

I think the piccy is supposed to be Taranto, but you get the drift...

ORIGINAL: Jakerson

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
I respectfully disagree with your observations about 'the only skilled attack'. Hitting ANY moving ship with a torpedo is tough and requires skill. Hell, hitting a stationary target with a torpedo takes a skill that I can't even imagine.

If you're looking at other examples, consider Hiryu's second counterattack against a repaired Yorktown. 10 B5N2s scoring 2 hits and crippling the carrier for a second time. IIRC, the flight leader, Tomonaga was killed during this attack (he missed).

That's not only an awe-inspiring example of skill, but of heroism.

Hard or not it was pretty dangerous attacking against task forces as torpedo bomber pilot in some cases you get better chances to survive alive by playing couple rounds of russian roulette with revolver than as torpedo bomber pilot. [:)]

At least with Russian roulette, there is a good chance they will find my body....[8D]

Guys, I am not detracting anything you say. But the pilots & commanders themselves say the hit was more due to luck than anything else. Of course, a real soldier makes his own luck.

My point is simply to understand where the value of 'luck' comes in, as opposed to training & doctrine. Case in point, 17 Nells attack Force Z for one hit. Follow on forces make history. Nine Swordfish flown by green aviators score 1 hit. Follow on forces again make history. The only attack where dedicated torpedo planes on a specific mission accomplished accomplished their goal that I can so far find is Rennell Island. It was decidedly difficult to put such a weapon on target from such a platform, no matter the skill.

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

Guys, I am not detracting anything you say. But the pilots & commanders themselves say the hit was more due to luck than anything else. Of course, a real soldier makes his own luck.

My point is simply to understand where the value of 'luck' comes in, as opposed to training & doctrine. Case in point, 17 Nells attack Force Z for one hit. Follow on forces make history. Nine Swordfish flown by green aviators score 1 hit. Follow on forces again make history. The only attack where dedicated torpedo planes on a specific mission accomplished accomplished their goal that I can so far find is Rennell Island. It was decidedly difficult to put such a weapon on target from such a platform, no matter the skill.

warspite1

I certainly cannot recall any SM.79's sinking any RN warship in the Med. They certainly damaged a few (cruisers mainly) - although I may be wrong.

When you compare a Torpedo Bomber - the time (seconds) it takes to drop that fish with the AAA bursting around you - to a Submarine Commander who has the time to set up, use mathematical reasoning etc - then..well..certainly luck, skill and heroism.

The attack of the TBDs (22 I think) at Coral Sea also deserve some mention since they apparently scored 5 hits in the first wave and 2 more in the second wave. That's somewhat over 30% total. The SBDs scored some hits (2) first aand it didn't slow Shoho down much but Lexington's TBDs apparently got 5 torpedo hits - pretty good.

TBDs made a torpedo attack on transports unloading at Lae in April 1942 and they scored some hits there too. The torpedo drop on the Shoho was probably the most textbook combat drop the USN ever did.

Beauforts did some harrowing torpedo attacks. A strike launched at long range on the Lutzow along the Norwegian coast was notable. All but one 42 Squadron Beaufort got lost. The one plane managed to score a hit on the Lutzow putting her out of service for some time. Beauforts based at Malta and Alexandria gave the Italians a lot of headaches in the Med.

The Beauforts were replaced by torpedo carrying Beaufighters around Europe. For targeting smaller ships, rockets became the weapon of choice, but Torpbeaus still dropped torpedoes on larger targets.

Bill

ORIGINAL: spence

The attack of the TBDs (22 I think) at Coral Sea also deserve some mention since they apparently scored 5 hits in the first wave and 2 more in the second wave. That's somewhat over 30% total. The SBDs scored some hits (2) first aand it didn't slow Shoho down much but Lexington's TBDs apparently got 5 torpedo hits - pretty good.

More research for me. I thought they scored 2 hits, and I was not sure if it was before or after

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

Guys, I am not detracting anything you say. But the pilots & commanders themselves say the hit was more due to luck than anything else. Of course, a real soldier makes his own luck.

My point is simply to understand where the value of 'luck' comes in, as opposed to training & doctrine. Case in point, 17 Nells attack Force Z for one hit. Follow on forces make history. Nine Swordfish flown by green aviators score 1 hit. Follow on forces again make history. The only attack where dedicated torpedo planes on a specific mission accomplished accomplished their goal that I can so far find is Rennell Island. It was decidedly difficult to put such a weapon on target from such a platform, no matter the skill.

warspite1

I certainly cannot recall any SM.79's sinking any RN warship in the Med. They certainly damaged a few (cruisers mainly) - although I may be wrong.

S.79 and S.84:

At least an auxiliary sunk, i think an AA ship was also sunk, a destroyer HMS Bedouin sunk after being damaged by Italian cruisers in a naval battle.

There were 7 hits in British cruisers - HMS Liverpool twice, 1 hit in Battleship, 1 hit in a Carrier, some other hits in destroyers.
Then there are several merchants sunk and damaged.

PS: it should be noted that Italian had a very low number of Torpedo bombers initially, they started the war with zero in fact. Later missions against warships were all done against convoys for Malta, that had carrier escort.

PS2: there was also a non traditional torpedo launched from altitude with a parachute, Motobomba FFF was a circular torpedo (bought also by Germans as LT280 and LT350) also had 2 or 3 hits as far is know only in harbors.

What about Midway USN torpedo strikes? They scored exactly 0 hits while losing 35 of 41 planes themselves... Yet their contribution to battle was absolutely critical!