Quote:
Originally Posted by dimlee
3000m is too much, IMHO. I doubt that torpedo bombers achieved any hits at this distance in WWII, unless flying in large numbers.
|
The USN aerial warfare doctrine during the 40's determined, for attacks against armed vessels, that dive bombers should begin the attack, and then torpedo- bombers should finish it launching torpedoes against the damaged and weakened targets.
Of course, the number of involved a/c should be really big for to achieve targets.
But, in the other hand, think about a medium bomber, like He-111 or Ju-88 or a Betty, into the role as torpedo attacker.
Against unescorted convoys they could launch torpedoes from less than 1000 m.
But against heavily escorted convoys with a good and dense screen of destroyers and also light cruisers, those big birds flying at 30-50 m @SL and at 200 km/h would mean the loss of several expensive flights or squadrons in one only mission.
No navy or air force could support such degree of attrition: the standard training for bomber's pilots demanded 55 weeks at least. Plus several weeks for specific misions like this which we're talking about.
3000 m becomes a good and safe distance if a convoy is sailing at steady speed and heading. But when enemy planes were spotted, the fleets started maneouvers for to avoid hits... and the torpedo-bombers should approach and penetrate into the dangerous range of the AAA, for to launch their attack from a shorter distance.
Therefore, the USN doctrine (and probably all the main powers involved in the 2WW had similar doctrines) was right: the torpedo-bombers should attack after the dive bombers, in big number, and from different directions.