Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: Charles Lindbergh <spirit@stlouis.com>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Subject: Re: Seldom-seen WWII pix
Message-ID: <b59fsadu8g9nnj4qh6nub387hj3ijbv5it@4ax.com>
References: <dLOdnTm3dMJtwVjInZ2dnUU7-SUAAAAA@earthlink.com> <1pmdnTM0ffhQeVjInZ2dnUU7-KednZ2d@giganews.com> <vcvbsahp93vng455j4fpp6ksisfdae88ru@4ax.com> <p5mdncOYc7skilvInZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <fdlesahovnchmk7c2cdrg516dd1hgp1nmf@4ax.com> <XYudnTdu6Zc69VrInZ2dnUU7-YudnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/7.00.32.1200
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 80
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Easynews - www.easynews.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sun, 09 Aug 2015 12:07:00 -0700
X-Received-Body-CRC: 4053338670
X-Received-Bytes: 4827
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.pictures.aviation:2241
wrote:
>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!
Don't worry about that, it's over rated........
|
| 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 |
|