Post by warspite1 on Jun 12, 2020 10:02:04 GMT
First published on Forumini February 2008
*** *** *** ***
The Douglas TBD Devastator suffered overwhelming losses at Midway while flying in an extremely hostile environment. Few torpedo-carrying aircraft could have been expected to have achieved much in that situation and some historians have chosen to write-off the type as 'obsolete' without considering the aircraft's true value.
It achieved some noteable firsts. When it began operations with the US Fleet in November 1937 it was the first all-metal and first low-wing aeroplane to see service with the USN. It was also the first US machine to have pilot-operated folding wings. This later feature had led to consternation on some airfields, with the emergency trucks being called out by the control tower staff on more than one occasion as the pilot taxied-in and folded his own wings as he rolled.
The folding wing also led to one fatality when an incorrectly locked wing folded shortly after take-off and the aeroplane promptly crashed and killed the sole occupant. So the situation in 1937 was that the TBD-1 was the bright and shiny 'new kid on the block' - yet by 1942 it was being hacked out of the air by Zeroes [Zekes] at Midway.
The intervening years between 1937 and 1942 had seen many developments in engines and armament and the arrival in 1940 of the Zero/Zeke would put a strain even on newer fighter aircraft like the Wildcat and the Spitfire. The Devastator should have been expected to last longer in service but with war clouds on the horizon the pace of development stepped up and within a short time it looked very 'old hat'.
However the Devastator did not have an all-bad war. It took part in some of the USN's first offensive operations such as the raid on Kwajalein in Feb 1942. The first wave of nine from VT-6 went in armed with 3x 500 pounder bombs and these then returned for a second strike with torpedoes. Three Devastators were hit by the intense flak but none were lost. Japanese losses amounted to two transports sunk, two submarines, a light cruiser and a gunboat damaged and two cargo ships disabled.
More Devastators of VT-5 hit Jaluit the same day but these encountered bad weather. Despite that a large transport, small craft and shore installations were hit [evidently this was also a bombing attack as it is notoriously difficult to torpedo a shore installation
]. The same day VT-6 bombed the airfield at Taroa destroying aircraft on the ground, an ammunition dump and numerous buildings.
At Wake Island on Feb 24, 1942, VT-6 again went in as horizontal bombers carrying 12x 100pounders to hit the petrol storage tanks. 7 out of ten tanks were destroyed for no losses to the Devastators. Further attacks by VT-2 and VT-5 at Lae and Salamua saw torpedoes being launched on Japanese shipping. 25 torps were dropped to destroy or damage 10 vessels. Again no Devastators were lost.
At Coral Sea VT-5 attacked shipping in Tulagi Harbour and sank the minesweeper Tama Maru but a second raid on the same target was unsuccessful. Again no Devastators were lost. On May 7 VT-2 and VT-5 took part in the sinking of the light carrier Shoho but both units failed against Shokaku. At least 19 Devastators were lost aboard the Lexington when she burned and sank.
Midway, as already mentioned, was a massacre for the Devastators with VT-8 losing all but one man, VT-6 lost all but three aeroplanes and the USS Yorktown only recovered one of VT-5's aircraft. However the Devastator's losses did draw down the Zero CAP and allow the Dauntless dive bombers an almost unobstructed run on their targets.
The Devastator continued to serve with VT-4 and VT-7 after Midway but confidence in the type was eroded and it was soon replaced by the Grumman TBM Avenger. Most surviving Devastators ended their days as practice wrecks for fire-fighting crews.
2020 edit: in assessing the Devastator we tend to look at its Midway performance in much the same way as the RAF Fairey Battle is regarded in the Fall of France. High losses must mean it is a 'bad' aircraft. If we look again at the circumstances of those losses you will see that both types were thrown into combat against an enemy which had overwhelming air superiority and - in the case of the Fall of France - excellent low level flak as well. I made the point elsewhere many years ago that the Japanese 'Kate' and the Fairey Battle had very similar tech specs except that the Battle could not carry a torpedo. Yet the Kate is normally viewed as a successful type and the Battle is not.
I would contend that in assessing an aeroplane's merits as either bad or good, one should review its whole history and also the details of those circumstances that give it a 'bad' reputation. I would certainly argue that the Battle and the Devastator were not intrinsically bad. The worst that could be said is that they were out of their depth and thrown into a losing scenario. Replace them with Avengers and I think the same would have happened - and remember that only one of the six Midway Avengers returned home as well. Is the Avenger a bad type? No. Is the Devastator? I argue... also no!
In game terms the Devastator is modelled as a torpedo plane only with limited ASW of two dice. As can be seen above at least two anchored subs were hit by bombs. The card makes no mention of bombing as an option. I recommend [in line with the Kate and Betty cards] that one bombing attack be allowed - per game - using only five dice to reflect a more limited bomb load. In a harbour/land forces attack scenario the Devastator should be allowed this same bomb load [five dice] as often as required.
Barry
*** *** *** ***
The Douglas TBD Devastator suffered overwhelming losses at Midway while flying in an extremely hostile environment. Few torpedo-carrying aircraft could have been expected to have achieved much in that situation and some historians have chosen to write-off the type as 'obsolete' without considering the aircraft's true value.
It achieved some noteable firsts. When it began operations with the US Fleet in November 1937 it was the first all-metal and first low-wing aeroplane to see service with the USN. It was also the first US machine to have pilot-operated folding wings. This later feature had led to consternation on some airfields, with the emergency trucks being called out by the control tower staff on more than one occasion as the pilot taxied-in and folded his own wings as he rolled.
The folding wing also led to one fatality when an incorrectly locked wing folded shortly after take-off and the aeroplane promptly crashed and killed the sole occupant. So the situation in 1937 was that the TBD-1 was the bright and shiny 'new kid on the block' - yet by 1942 it was being hacked out of the air by Zeroes [Zekes] at Midway.
The intervening years between 1937 and 1942 had seen many developments in engines and armament and the arrival in 1940 of the Zero/Zeke would put a strain even on newer fighter aircraft like the Wildcat and the Spitfire. The Devastator should have been expected to last longer in service but with war clouds on the horizon the pace of development stepped up and within a short time it looked very 'old hat'.
However the Devastator did not have an all-bad war. It took part in some of the USN's first offensive operations such as the raid on Kwajalein in Feb 1942. The first wave of nine from VT-6 went in armed with 3x 500 pounder bombs and these then returned for a second strike with torpedoes. Three Devastators were hit by the intense flak but none were lost. Japanese losses amounted to two transports sunk, two submarines, a light cruiser and a gunboat damaged and two cargo ships disabled.
More Devastators of VT-5 hit Jaluit the same day but these encountered bad weather. Despite that a large transport, small craft and shore installations were hit [evidently this was also a bombing attack as it is notoriously difficult to torpedo a shore installation
]. The same day VT-6 bombed the airfield at Taroa destroying aircraft on the ground, an ammunition dump and numerous buildings.At Wake Island on Feb 24, 1942, VT-6 again went in as horizontal bombers carrying 12x 100pounders to hit the petrol storage tanks. 7 out of ten tanks were destroyed for no losses to the Devastators. Further attacks by VT-2 and VT-5 at Lae and Salamua saw torpedoes being launched on Japanese shipping. 25 torps were dropped to destroy or damage 10 vessels. Again no Devastators were lost.
At Coral Sea VT-5 attacked shipping in Tulagi Harbour and sank the minesweeper Tama Maru but a second raid on the same target was unsuccessful. Again no Devastators were lost. On May 7 VT-2 and VT-5 took part in the sinking of the light carrier Shoho but both units failed against Shokaku. At least 19 Devastators were lost aboard the Lexington when she burned and sank.
Midway, as already mentioned, was a massacre for the Devastators with VT-8 losing all but one man, VT-6 lost all but three aeroplanes and the USS Yorktown only recovered one of VT-5's aircraft. However the Devastator's losses did draw down the Zero CAP and allow the Dauntless dive bombers an almost unobstructed run on their targets.
The Devastator continued to serve with VT-4 and VT-7 after Midway but confidence in the type was eroded and it was soon replaced by the Grumman TBM Avenger. Most surviving Devastators ended their days as practice wrecks for fire-fighting crews.
2020 edit: in assessing the Devastator we tend to look at its Midway performance in much the same way as the RAF Fairey Battle is regarded in the Fall of France. High losses must mean it is a 'bad' aircraft. If we look again at the circumstances of those losses you will see that both types were thrown into combat against an enemy which had overwhelming air superiority and - in the case of the Fall of France - excellent low level flak as well. I made the point elsewhere many years ago that the Japanese 'Kate' and the Fairey Battle had very similar tech specs except that the Battle could not carry a torpedo. Yet the Kate is normally viewed as a successful type and the Battle is not.
I would contend that in assessing an aeroplane's merits as either bad or good, one should review its whole history and also the details of those circumstances that give it a 'bad' reputation. I would certainly argue that the Battle and the Devastator were not intrinsically bad. The worst that could be said is that they were out of their depth and thrown into a losing scenario. Replace them with Avengers and I think the same would have happened - and remember that only one of the six Midway Avengers returned home as well. Is the Avenger a bad type? No. Is the Devastator? I argue... also no!
In game terms the Devastator is modelled as a torpedo plane only with limited ASW of two dice. As can be seen above at least two anchored subs were hit by bombs. The card makes no mention of bombing as an option. I recommend [in line with the Kate and Betty cards] that one bombing attack be allowed - per game - using only five dice to reflect a more limited bomb load. In a harbour/land forces attack scenario the Devastator should be allowed this same bomb load [five dice] as often as required.
Barry