American light bombers and reconnaissance aircrafts

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

gekho

Master Sergeant
2,816
77
Jan 1, 2010
Spain
Brewster SB2A Buccaneer

The Buccaneer is a prime example of how a design that looked good on paper in 1939 can be woefully lacking by 1941. Between the drawing board and the production line, the SB2A put on substantial additional weight that overwhelmed her 1,700 horse power engine and out dated air frame, resulting in a ship that proved to be, slow, sluggish, and with unpleasant handling qwerks. Though many other stats appear comparable to the Grumman TBF on paper, her inferior wing area, bomb load, and real world performance put her way behind the Avenger. The initial delivery of SB-2A- 2s 3s were quickly relegated to training duties. 162 non folding wing Buccaneers ordered by the Dutch were taken over by the Navy, christened the "SB2A-4," and used by the Marines as trainers for the first two years of the War. (That is the version featured in this film. Perhaps the high point of the Buccaneers service for the Navy was there use in the Marines first Night Fighter squadron, VMF(N) 5-31.

The British ordered the SB2A under Lend Lease as the "Bermuda," and quickly came to the same conclusion about her as the Americans, Most were quickly relegated to such duties as target tug towing, although there is a report that they were used with some success as a level bomber in the plane starved India-Burma campaign.

Source: See Brewster SB2A Buccaneer Training Film Live Online
 

Attachments

  • Brewster SB2A-4 Buccaneer 001.jpg
    Brewster SB2A-4 Buccaneer 001.jpg
    99 KB · Views: 383
  • Brewster SB2A-4 Buccaneer 002.jpg
    Brewster SB2A-4 Buccaneer 002.jpg
    131.9 KB · Views: 350
The Fairey Battle was a British single-engine light bomber built by the Fairey Aviation Company in the late 1930s for the Royal Air Force. The Battle was powered by the same Rolls-Royce Merlin piston engine that gave contemporary British fighters high performance; however, the Battle was weighed down with a three-man crew and a bomb load. Despite being a great improvement on the aircraft that preceded it, by the time it saw action it was slow, limited in range and highly vulnerable to both anti-aircraft fire and fighters with its single defensive .303 machine gun.

During the "Phoney War", the Fairey Battle recorded the first RAF aerial victory of the Second World War but by May 1940 was suffering heavy losses of well over 50% per mission. By the end of 1940 the Battle had been withdrawn from combat service and relegated to training units overseas. For such prewar promise, the Battle was one of the most disappointing of all RAF aircraft.

Note: I had no idea that the Fairey Battles served with the USAC, but this picture is an evidence, so any further information is welcome.
 

Attachments

  • Fairey Battle.jpg
    Fairey Battle.jpg
    107.3 KB · Views: 341
Interesting pic. It seems to have a different engine installation, possibly/probably 'H' block, judging by the exhausts, and what appear to be possibly contra-rotating, twin-blade props. Strange!
 
I believe that is equiped with the Fairy Prince or Monarch engine, neither ever went into production. I cannot find anywhere where the US ever used one. Perhaps this was a demo to try and get sales????


EDIT: Just found some info:

"Battle K9370 was used to test the Fairey Monarch 2,000+ hp (1,490+ kW) aero-engine with electrically-controlled three-blade contra-rotating propellors in 1939. According to Jane's All the World's Aircraft 1946-47, the aircraft was shipped to the U.S.A. after 86 hours test time."

http://www.enotes.com/topic/Fairey_Battle

For whatever reason if you look hard enough, you can see where the 3rd blade has been "painted out" of the photo.
 
Last edited:
There's a thread about the Prince and Monarch engines, which contains info on examination of the powerplant by the US:

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/fairey-aero-engines-any-good-info-30710.html

Hey, VikingBerserker, If I can remember correctly one of the Fairey engines was under consideration for a possible powerplant for the P-47; it was going to be built by Ford, so the Battle was sent to the USA.

That's a neat pic of the Battle, Gekho :)
 
Last edited:
In 1940 the U.S. Army Air Corps ordered 203 Curtiss O-52s for observation duties -- signified by the designation "O" -- and used them for military maneuvers within the continental United States. Upon America's entry into World War II, however, the U.S. Army Air Forces realized that the airplane lacked the performance necessary for combat operations overseas. As a result, the Army relegated the O-52 to stateside courier duties and short-range submarine patrols off the coasts of the United States. The O-52 was the last "O" type airplane procured in quantity for the Army. Following the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Army Air Forces cancelled the "O" designation and adopted "L" for the liaison type airplanes that replaced it.

Source: Factsheets : Curtiss O-52 Owl
 

Attachments

  • Curtiss O-52 Owl 001.jpg
    Curtiss O-52 Owl 001.jpg
    101.5 KB · Views: 322
  • Curtiss O-52 Owl 002.jpg
    Curtiss O-52 Owl 002.jpg
    100.6 KB · Views: 343
  • Curtiss O-52 Owl 003.jpg
    Curtiss O-52 Owl 003.jpg
    63.1 KB · Views: 310
The Curtiss A-25 Shrike represented the end of an obsolete concept -- the single-engine, two-seat dive bomber. A modified version of the U.S. Navy's new SB2C Helldiver, the U.S. Army Air Corps ordered 100 A-25s in 1940. Although initial testing revealed some problems, the A-25 went into production, and the U.S. Army Air Forces ordered 3,000 in February 1942. In March 1943, a USAAF board determined that single-engine, two-seat attack aircraft like the A-25 were too vulnerable to enemy fighters. They recommended canceling the production of this type and relying instead on more effective single seat fighter-bombers. Although A-25 production halted, 900 had already been built. The USAAF transferred 410 A-25s to the U.S. Marine Corps. Those that remained were redesignated the RA-25A (for "restricted" to non-combat use). Some flew as trainers or light personnel and cargo transports. Interestingly, Womens Airforce Service Pilots (WASP) used A-25s (and A-24s) to fly gunnery training missions. These flights involved towing a target sleeve on a long wire past ground anti-aircraft gunners, who then shot at the sleeve with live ammunition.
 

Attachments

  • Curtiss A-25 Shikre 001.jpg
    Curtiss A-25 Shikre 001.jpg
    110.5 KB · Views: 324
  • Curtiss A-25 Shikre 002.jpg
    Curtiss A-25 Shikre 002.jpg
    97.1 KB · Views: 296
  • Curtiss A-25 Shikre 003.jpg
    Curtiss A-25 Shikre 003.jpg
    119.7 KB · Views: 296
The Helldiver was ordered into large-scale production in 1940, the prototype making its first flight on 18 December of that year. SB2Cs went into action for the first time on 11 November 1943 in a heavy raid on the major Japanese base of Rabaul, flying from the new Essex Class carrier Bunker Hill. This large, heavy, impressive and powerful dive-bomber was intended as an improvement on the SBD Dauntless, which it was to replace. However, during ithe SB2C's development it became apparent that there were serious problems with its design. Combat experience, especially at the Battle of the Philippine Sea, revealed that the Dauntless was in fact the superior aircraft. The Helldiver's handling was poor - in particular it had unsatisfactory low-speed stability, and dangerously poor stalling characteristics. It was also unstable in a high-speed dive, and therefore a less accurate bomber than the SBD. Since dive-bombing was the aircraft's raison d'etre, this fault alone was enough to make the SB2C an unacceptable replacement for the Dauntless. However, it was at this stage impossible to reverse the changeover to the Helldiver, and the Philippine Sea battle was the SBD's last major action as a carrier aircraft. Despite its initial lacklustre showing - and its inherent defects - the SB2C served as the sole shipborne dive-bomber of the US Navy from late 1944 until the end of the war, inflicting immense damage on enemy shipping and installations.
 

Attachments

  • Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 001.jpg
    Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 001.jpg
    136.7 KB · Views: 318
  • Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 002.jpg
    Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 002.jpg
    105.8 KB · Views: 297
  • Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 003.jpg
    Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 003.jpg
    129.7 KB · Views: 297
  • Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 005.jpg
    Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 005.jpg
    95.7 KB · Views: 288
  • Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 006.jpg
    Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 006.jpg
    109.5 KB · Views: 275
  • Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 007.jpg
    Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 007.jpg
    126.5 KB · Views: 277
The U.S. Navy would not accept the SB2C until 880 modifications to the design and the changes on the production line had been made, delaying the Curtiss Helldiver's combat debut until November 11, 1943 with squadron VB-17 on the USS Bunker Hill, when they attacked the Japanese-held port of Rabaul on the island of New Britain, north of Papua New Guinea. The first version of the SB2C-1 was kept stateside for training, its various development problems leading to only 200 being built. The first deployment model being the SB2C-1C. The SB2C-1 could deploy slats mechanically linked with undercarriage actuation extended from the outer third of the wing leading edge to aid lateral control at low speeds. The early prognosis of the "Beast" was unfavourable as it was strongly disliked by aircrews due to its size, weight, and reduced range than the SBD it replaced. In the first Battle of the Philippine Sea, 45 Helldivers were lost because they ran out of fuel on the return to their carriers. The litany of faults that the Helldiver bore included the fact that it was underpowered, had a shorter range than the SBD, was equipped with an unreliable electrical system and was often poorly manufactured. The Curtiss-Electric propeller and the complex hydraulic system had frequent maintenance problems. One of the faults remaining with the aircraft through its operational life was poor longitudinal stability, resulting from a fuselage that was too short by necessity of the SB2C to fit on aircraft carrier elevators. The Helldiver's aileron response was also poor and handling suffered greatly under 90 knots airspeed; since the speed of approach to land on a carrier was supposed to be 85 knots, this proved problematic. The 880 changes demanded by the Navy and modification of the aircraft to its combat role resulted in a 42% weight increase, explaining much of the problem.

The problems began to be solved with the introduction of the SB2C-3 beginning in 1944, which used the R-2600-20 Twin Cyclone engine with 1,900 HP and Curtiss' 4-bladed propeller. This substantially solved the chronic lack of power that had plagued the aircraft. The Helldivers would participate in battles over the Marianas, Philippines (partly responsible for sinking the Musashi), Taiwan, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa (in the sinking of the Yamato). They were also used in the 1945 attacks on the Ryuku Islands and the Japanese home island of Honshū in tactical attacks on airfields, communications, and shipping. They were also used extensively in patrols during the period between the dropping of the atomic bombs and the official Japanese surrender, and in the immediate pre-occupation period. An oddity of the SB2Cs with 1942 to 1943-style tricolor camouflage was that the undersides of the outer wing panels carried dark topside camouflage because the undersurfaces were visible from above when the wings were folded. In operational experience it was found that the U.S. Navy's F6F Hellcat and F4U Corsair fighters were able to carry an equally heavy bomb load against ground targets and were vastly more capable of defending themselves against enemy fighters.[18] The Helldiver, however, could still deliver ordnance with more precision against specific targets and its two seat configuration permitted a second set of eyes.

It was the advent of air to ground rockets which allowed the precision attack of ocean surface and shore based targets without the stress and performance issues of near-vertical dives that dive bombers had to endure[7] that ensured the SB2C was the last purpose-built dive bomber produced. Postwar, the SB2C remained in active service in the US Navy until 1947 and naval reserve units until 1950. Surplus aircraft were sold to the naval air forces of France, Italy, Greece, Portugal, and Thailand. Greek SB2Cs served in combat in the Greek Civil War with additional machine guns mounted in wing pods. French SB2Cs flew in the First Indochina War from 1951–1954.
 

Attachments

  • Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 008.jpg
    Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 008.jpg
    120.9 KB · Views: 341
  • Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 009.jpg
    Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 009.jpg
    87.1 KB · Views: 287
  • Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 0010.jpg
    Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 0010.jpg
    170.4 KB · Views: 292
  • Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 0011.jpg
    Curtiss SB2C Helldiver 0011.jpg
    102.6 KB · Views: 281
  • Curtiss SB2C Seaplane 001.jpg
    Curtiss SB2C Seaplane 001.jpg
    107.8 KB · Views: 295
  • Curtiss SB2C Seaplane 002.jpg
    Curtiss SB2C Seaplane 002.jpg
    79.3 KB · Views: 292
The O-46A was designed to operate from established airfields behind fairly static battle lines as in World War I; however, in 1939 a report was issued on the O-46A that stated it was too slow and heavy to outrun and outmaneuver enemy pursuit planes, too heavy to operate from small, wet, unprepared fields, and too large to conceal beneath trees. This report was a forecast of the future, for World War II, with its rapidly changing battle lines proved the need for light, maneuverable observation aircraft that could operate from unimproved airstrips. The Air Corps ordered 90 O-46As in 1935. At least 11 saw overseas duty; two were destroyed in the Japanese raid on Clark Field in the Philippines on Dec. 8, 1941. The remaining O-46s were declared obsolete in late 1942 and after that were used primarily in training and utility roles.

Source: Factsheets : Douglas O-46A
 

Attachments

  • Douglas O-46.jpg
    Douglas O-46.jpg
    87.5 KB · Views: 339
From its introduction to U.S. Naval service in 1936, through its continued international military use into the 1970's, to the recent retirement of the last civilian fire-bomber, the Consolidated PBY Catalina has served a distinguished career as one of the most rugged and versatile aircraft in U.S. history. It was created in response to the U.S. Navy's 1933 request for a prototype to replace the Consolidated P2Y and the Martin P3M with a new patrol-bomber flying boat with extended range and greater load capacity.

The Catalina was created under the guidance of the brilliant aero-engineer Isaac Macklin Laddon. The new design introduced internal wing bracing, which greatly reduced the need for drag-producing struts and bracing wires. A significant improvement over its predecessors, it had a range of 2,545 miles, and a maximum take-off weight of 35,420 lbs. In 1939 the Navy considered discontinuing its use in favor of proposed replacements. The Catalina remained in production, however, because of massive orders placed by Britain, Canada, Australia, France, and the Netherlands. These countries desperately needed reliable patrol planes in their eleventh-hour preparations for WW II. Far from replacing the PBY, the Navy placed its largest single order since WW I for an aircraft.

Over the years, numerous improvements were made to the design. An amphibious version, the PBY-5A, was developed in 1939, through the addition of a retractable tricycle undercarriage. The PBY-6A featured hydrodynamic improvements designed by the Naval Aircraft Factory. The Soviet Union produced a license-built version for their Navy called the GST and powered by Mikulin M-62 radial engines. Boeing Aircraft of Canada built the PB2B-1 and PB2B-2 ("Canso"), and a derivative of the PBY-5A was built by Canadian Vickers. In US Army Air Force service, the aircraft was known as the OA-10A (PBY-5A) and OA-10B (PBY-6A). The Royal Air Force's Coastal Command flew Catalinas under the designations Catalina Mk I/II/III/IV.

A total of approximately 4000 Catalinas were built between 1936 and 1945. Because of their worldwide popularity, there was scarcely a maritime battle in WW II in which they were not involved. The PBY had its vulnerabilities: it was slow, with a maximum speed of 179 mph, and with no crew armor or self-sealing tanks, it was highly vulnerable to anti-aircraft attack. However it was these weaknesses, coincident with the development of effective radar, and Japanese reliance on night transport, which led to the development of the "Black Cat Squadrons." These crews performed nighttime search and attack missions in their black-painted PBYs. The tactics were spectacularly successful and seriously disrupted the flow of supplies and personnel to Japanese island bases. The Catalinas also proved effective in search and rescue missions, code-named "Dumbo." Small detachments (normally of three PBYs) routinely orbited on stand-by near targeted combat areas. One detachment based in the Solomon islands rescued 161 airmen between January 1 and August 15, 1943, and successes increased steadily as equipment and tactics improved. After WW II, the PBY continued its search and rescue service in many Central and South American countries, as well as in Denmark, until the 1970's. The Catalina has also proved useful in civilian service: in scheduled passenger flights in Alaska and the Caribbean, in geophysical survey, and mostly, in fire-bombing for the U.S. Forest Service until the recent retirement of the last PBY. Through its long and varied service, the Consolidated PBY Catalina has earned its reputation as the workhorse of naval aviation.
 

Attachments

  • Consolidated PYB Cataliana 001.jpg
    Consolidated PYB Cataliana 001.jpg
    107.4 KB · Views: 287
  • Consolidated PYB Cataliana 002.jpg
    Consolidated PYB Cataliana 002.jpg
    62.7 KB · Views: 283
  • Consolidated PYB Cataliana 003.jpg
    Consolidated PYB Cataliana 003.jpg
    124.3 KB · Views: 278
  • Consolidated PYB Cataliana 004.jpg
    Consolidated PYB Cataliana 004.jpg
    144.6 KB · Views: 288
  • Consolidated PYB Cataliana 005.jpg
    Consolidated PYB Cataliana 005.jpg
    135.3 KB · Views: 291
  • Consolidated PYB Cataliana 006.jpg
    Consolidated PYB Cataliana 006.jpg
    114.7 KB · Views: 267
  • Consolidated PYB Cataliana 007.jpg
    Consolidated PYB Cataliana 007.jpg
    88.3 KB · Views: 287
  • Consolidated PYB Catalina 008.jpg
    Consolidated PYB Catalina 008.jpg
    171.5 KB · Views: 294
  • Consolidated PYB Catalina 009.jpg
    Consolidated PYB Catalina 009.jpg
    184.8 KB · Views: 292
  • Consolidated PYB Catalina 0010.jpg
    Consolidated PYB Catalina 0010.jpg
    85.1 KB · Views: 278
  • Consolidated PYB Catalina 0011.jpg
    Consolidated PYB Catalina 0011.jpg
    86 KB · Views: 274
The XTBD-1 first flew on April 15, 1935 and nine days later was delivered to Navy for testing. It was designed to a specification for aircraft operating from a new class of carriers the Navy was launching, the first of which was the USS Ranger. On June 25, 1937 Douglas began delivery of 114 TBD-1s and by 1938 the type had proved very successful in trials and combat exercises. Upon its introduction, the Americans considered the Devastator the most modern and effective torpedo bomber perhaps in the world, and the design often referred to as "radical", but it was nowhere near as successful as the Japanese Imperial Navy's carrier-based torpedo bomber, the Nakajima B5N (Kate), which dealt fatal blows to the US Navy's, Lexington, Yorktown and Hornet. There were a number of "firsts" associated with the TBD; the "Devastator" was the first monoplane design ordered for service with the US Navy; it was the first with hydraulic (as opposed to "manual") folding wings; it was the first "all metal" aircraft ordered by the Navy. The carriers Saratoga, Enterprise, Lexington, Wasp, Hornet, Yorktown and Ranger were all equipped with the Devastator as the standard torpedo bomber. And, although Devastator production totaled only 129 aircraft, it achieved a notoriety completely out of proportion to its numbers.

It had a crew of three; a pilot, a gunner facing aft and a bombardier who sat in between. In combat, the bombardier lay prone just behind the engine, peering through a window in the bottom of the fuselage to release the torpedo or bomb. The Devastator was furnished with one forward firing Colt/Browning .30 caliber machine gun operated by the pilot. Depending on the circumstances (and the CO) the forward gun was replaced with a .50 caliber. Exterior indications of which gun was mounted could be determined by the presence of a blister behind the air intake on the starboard side. This blister was a breech fairing for the Colt/Browning .50 caliber M2. Another .30 caliber Colt/Browning was mounted in the rear gunners position. The engine was the Pratt-Whitney 1830-64 Twin Wasp rated at 850 hp. (634 kW). It's wings spanned 50 feet (15.24 m), taking up a lot of room in the cramped innards of a carrier. So, Douglas designed them to fold upwards reducing the space to 26 feet (7.92 m). The wheels folded backwards into the wing, though they were designed to protrude about 10" (254 mm) below the wing just in case the TBD had to make a wheels-up landing. The sleek 35' (10.67 m) fuselage was covered with a "greenhouse" canopy reaching over halfway to the tail.
 

Attachments

  • Douglas TBD Devastator 001.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 001.jpg
    267.8 KB · Views: 280
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 002.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 002.jpg
    81.5 KB · Views: 283
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 003.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 003.jpg
    92.7 KB · Views: 280
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 004.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 004.jpg
    132.9 KB · Views: 281
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 005.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 005.jpg
    71.3 KB · Views: 289
Near the beginning of the new decade (1940), naval intelligence indicated the TBD might be losing its combat edge to foreign designs and wheels were set in (slow) motion to find a replacement. There seemed to be no rush in spite of the wars heating up in Asia and Europe. A mere 3 years earlier, the Devastator had been state-of-the-art and it couldn't have become totally obsolete in that short of period, or so the thinking went. Two years later the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. At that time the Navy still had a hundred TBDs on the rosters, spread out among the aircraft carriers. By chance, the aircraft carriers were not in Pearl Harbor and escaped destruction when the Japanese assaulted "Battleship Row" on December 7, 1941.

But the Navy's squadron commanders were beginning to worry about some of the planes their men would take into battle, particularly the TBD with its top speed of 206 mph (332 km/h). Intelligence reports on the Japanese Mitsubishi A6M Zero-Sen (Zero) indicated its top speed was well over 325 mph (523 km/h). The fact Japan had such a fast and nimble aircraft came as a great shock to American military planners who had been led to believe the Japanese had only inferior copies of European designs. The Devastator was scheduled to be replaced by the Grumman TBF Avenger. During the first five months of 1942, the TBD seemed to lead a charmed life. By February 1942, the carriers were making raids on island bastions in the Marshalls and Gilberts held by the Japanese which were largely successful and the Devastator gave a good account of itself during these battles. On May 7, TBDs were instrumental in the sinking of the Japanese carrier "Shoho" in the Battle of the Coral Sea.

It was during this time when defects were first noted in the Mark XIII torpedo used by the TBD. Many of these torpedoes were seen to strike the target yet fail to explode. Submariners were having the same problems with the Mark XIV Field ordinance men attempted to modify the weapon until the Navy Bureau of Ordinance in Washington sent a direct order forbidding any modifications and assuring everyone the Mk XIII torpedo was faultless. BurOrd stuck with this position in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It seems the carrier groups took it at face value and looked for solutions in the maintenance and delivery of the weapon. Fortunately, the submariners persisted. Several problems with the torpedoes were eventually located. One problem was incredibly similar to the recent Mars Space Vehicle which "landed" 20 feet (6.1 m) after it impacted the surface due to a failure of technicians to convert altitude to metric units in the guidance computer programming.

The torpedoes had been tested with dummy warheads, that is, the space for the warhead had been filled with water when the torpedo was tested. No one apparently thought to ask how heavy the actual warhead would be, and the cost of the torpedoes entered the picture as a reason to curtail further testing of the torpedo. Due to the difference in weight of the dummy warhead and the actual warhead, the torpedo ran eleven to 14 feet below set depth. Several other problems prevented the weapon from working properly. These problems persisted for over two years because of the bone-headed attitude of BurOrd. Eventually, the top man in the Navy, Admiral Ernest King ordered BurOrd to get off its butt and test live torpedoes.
 

Attachments

  • Douglas TBD Devastator 001.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 001.jpg
    84.1 KB · Views: 287
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 002.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 002.jpg
    128.6 KB · Views: 274
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 003.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 003.jpg
    118.4 KB · Views: 272
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 004.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 004.jpg
    104.8 KB · Views: 270
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 005.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 005.jpg
    88.1 KB · Views: 279
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 006.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 006.jpg
    62.4 KB · Views: 271
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 007.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 007.jpg
    73.5 KB · Views: 260
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 008.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 008.jpg
    65.1 KB · Views: 277
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 009.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 009.jpg
    71.3 KB · Views: 278
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0010.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0010.jpg
    86.5 KB · Views: 278
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0011.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0011.jpg
    86.8 KB · Views: 282
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0012.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0012.jpg
    73.4 KB · Views: 277
However, long before the torpedo problem could be solved, operational problems doomed the TBD on the basis of a single mission. The mission began on June 4, 1942 when the TBDs were sent to attack the Japanese Imperial Fleet north of Midway Island and quite suddenly, the worst suspicions of Navy squadron commanders were confirmed. At 0700 hrs., Torpedo Squadron Eight (VT-8) of the aircraft carrier Hornet launched 15 TBDs, VT-6 of the Enterprise launched 14 TBDs. VT-3 on the Yorktown launched 12 TBDs. Due to cloudy weather, they lost their fighter escort and arrived at the scene of the battle without "top cover". Japanese A6M "Zeros" immediately attacked from the rear while the Imperial Fleet ships put up a wall of anti-aircraft fire from the front. The Zeros attacked while the TBDs were still more than 12 miles from the Imperial Fleet boats and one by one the TBDs splashed in. Not a single torpedo from these planes found a target. Of the 41 Devastators launched by the US Navy aircraft carriers, 37 failed to return to their ships. A loss rate of over 90%! After the Battle of Midway, the Navy struck the Douglas TBD "Devastator" from combat roles and it was relegated to training and communications roles.

Source: Douglas TBD Devastator - USA
 

Attachments

  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0013.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0013.jpg
    97.8 KB · Views: 383
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0014.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0014.jpg
    66.8 KB · Views: 313
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0015.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0015.jpg
    112.7 KB · Views: 292
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0016.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0016.jpg
    65.4 KB · Views: 410
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0018.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0018.jpg
    159.7 KB · Views: 288
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0019.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0019.jpg
    68.8 KB · Views: 273
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0020.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0020.jpg
    69 KB · Views: 291
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0021.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0021.jpg
    88.5 KB · Views: 283
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0022.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0022.jpg
    125.6 KB · Views: 303
  • Douglas TBD Devastator 0023.jpg
    Douglas TBD Devastator 0023.jpg
    124.6 KB · Views: 301

Users who are viewing this thread

Back