On 8/9/2015 2:31 PM, Charles Lindbergh wrote:
> wrote:
>
>> On 8/8/2015 2:04 PM, Charles Lindbergh wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/8/2015 2:35 AM, Byker wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Fairey Swordfish - A remarkable aircraft:
>>>>
>>>> "Although Swordfish numbered no more than 27 aircraft, they sank an
>>>> average 50,000 tons (50,800 MT) of shipping every month. During one
>>>> month, they sank a record 98,000 tons (99,572 MT). Swordfish attacked
>>>> enemy convoys at night although they were not equipped with night
>>>> instrumentation. The risky night missions were necessary to avoid German
>>>> fighters which encircled the island of Malta by day. On June 30, 1940,
>>>> Swordfish completed a raid attacking oil installations at Augusta in
>>>> Sicily."
>>>>
>>>> http://www.aviation-history.com/fairey/swordfish.html
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ricardo, I read the article you posted. I was shocked the Swordfish holds the record for sinking more tonnage
>>> than any other allied aircraft during WWII.
>>>
>>> I am guessing this had a lot to do with circumstance as opposed to any remarkable capabilities of the
>>> aircraft, what is your perspective on this?
>>>
>>
>> Well, one obvious thought must be that as the British had in excess of
>> two years of hostile action before any other major participants appeared
>> in the conflict on the Allied side, they bore the brunt of the onslaught
>> of the Axis powers. So, yes, circumstances and a frenzied fight to
>> survive meant that we had to fight with tooth and nail with every
>> available asset - even if some of those assets were completely outdated.
>>
>> Those two fraught years were used to good advantage, however, with
>> substantial losses being inflicted on the French and Italian navies, as
>> well as Germany's fleet. As early as 1940 it was Swordfish aircraft that
>> crippled the Italian fleet at Taranto, where two thirds of their
>> battleships were lost, as well as many other vessels, at the cost of two
>> Swordfish. These aircraft were also used against the French fleet in
>> 1940, following the fall of France, plus, in 1941, the Germans lost the
>> Bismark to the actions of these aircraft, which disabled her steering
>> mechanism.
>>
>> That said, it seems that the Swordfish was a versatile and easy to fly
>> aircraft, and its slow speed capability made it ideally suited to
>> carrier operations. It's interesting to note, given other recent
>> postings on this NG, that the Swordfish also used rocket assisted
>> take-off gear. They were also used as artillery spotter platforms for
>> warships.
>>
>> Its success can probably be defined by four factors:
>>
>> The first, as you surmised, being circumstances; second would be the
>> capabilities and sheer ruggedness of the aircraft; third would be the
>> rigorous training of the flight crews and, finally, the planning and
>> reconnaissance involved with the operations against major multiple targets.
>>
>> Of course, I could be wrong...
>>
>> ;-)
>>
>> I'm surprised to see that we actually exported Swordfish to five other
>> nations!
>
> You provided an interesting analysis, thanks for taking the time to do
> that!
>
Thank you Charles, it was my pleasure. It reminds me, however, that I
very rarely do any analytical thinking these days!
--
Moving Things In Still Pictures
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
|