Malaya What If

[Anteos]

Hi Everyone

I'm a long time luker and I've been following this thread for quite a while. A big thanks to FBC for his excellent writing and to the posters on this thread.

The loss of Prince of Wales and Repulse has always saddened me. I can remember reading about it as a child and it struck a chord.

I do wonder if the outcome could have been different if the air search radar had been working and the ammunition was better. iirc the Japanese pilots were surprised at the lack of tracer.

Imho it was the million to one torpedo hit which sealed their fate. If the hit had struck the torpedo defence system then I believe both ships may have survived, albeit damaged. The AA fire during the first wave was quite accurate and several planes were shot down and damaged.

There are so many variables to this sad battle and changing one slightly could've made the outcome a lot different. I look forward to following the story..... and hope these fine ships survive ;-)

many thanks

 

[Butchpfd]

With all the references to nicknames, we haven't discussed Thomas Hart. He was simply"Tommy" to his friends, to those that failed their duty, crossed him, or hurt his people, he was "Terrible Tommy".
Being a family friend, and shipmates of Mac Arthur's late brother, Hart was one of four men who could call MacArthur Douglas, the others being FDR, Marshall, and Stark. He was however the only one that could call and refer to Douglas.... Douggllass. Drawing out the name as payback for hs mistreatment.

 

[JWilly48519]

Figured that.. also remember that there is 20, 000 pounds of US aerial ordinance in Singapore, which will fit just fine on any of the PBYs which at this time had a bomb load of
3,000 lbs,, for a reduction of 40% in max range. Cache would include bombs up to 500 lbs. 325 lb depth Charges, and possibly Mk XIII aerial torps. My money would be on mostly depth charges but possibly maybe a half dozen torps. But at this time PBY-5s could not carry 2 torps, usually 1 torp. and 1,000 lbs of bombs on the other wing

How many pylons (or how many rack attachment points) per wing? Could the second wing have three depth charges?

Some online photos suggest two mount points per side, but three would be logical given likely missions, and the susceptibility of the plane to AA at reasonable bombing altitude.

 

[Errolwi]

Figured that.. also remember that there is 20, 000 pounds of US aerial ordinance in Singapore, which will fit just fine on any of the PBYs which at this time had a bomb load of
3,000 lbs,, for a reduction of 40% in max range. Cache would include bombs up to 500 lbs. 325 lb depth Charges, and possibly Mk XIII aerial torps. My money would be on mostly depth charges but possibly maybe a half dozen torps. But at this time PBY-5s could not carry 2 torps, usually 1 torp. and 1,000 lbs of bombs on the other wing

Assuming that they PBY crews haven't trained properly on torpedo attacks, I would suggest that they are better used on tasks other than a low-chance highly dangerous torpedo run.

 

[Driftless]

Assuming that they PBY crews haven't trained properly on torpedo attacks, I would suggest that they are better used on tasks other than a low-chance highly dangerous torpedo run.

PBY's weren't particularly nimble and formed a larger target, correct? Probably best not to attack a warship with even a modest amount of AAA on board.

PBY's to learn the torpedo attack trade against merchant vessel, with (hopefully) less fire power?

 

[Errolwi]

PBY's weren't particularly nimble and formed a larger target, correct? Probably best not to attack a warship with even a modest amount of AAA on board.

PBY's to learn the torpedo attack trade against merchant vessel, with (hopefully) less fire power?

The alternative torpedo carriers are Vildebeests, which were trained with. They didn't do well. PBYs are good long range patrollers.

 

[Sekhmet_D]

The alternative torpedo carriers are Vildebeests, which were trained with. They didn't do well. PBYs are good long range patrollers.

Don't forget Albacores. There was a small Albacore presence on Singapore with 36 Squadron.

 

[Butchpfd]

How many pylons (or how many rack attachment points) per wing? Could the second wing have three depth charges?

Some online photos suggest two mount points per side, but three would be logical given likely missions, and the susceptibility of the plane to AA at reasonable bombing altitude.

It varried those in the Atlantic usually carried , 3 DC per side in the PBY-5 and 4 on the 5a and 6. In the Pacific often crews changed out racks based on mission, Black Cats doing anti-shipping carried one torp and one bomb or depth charge per wing. Depth charges set shallow could really flip a barge.

 

[Butchpfd]

PBY's weren't particularly nimble and formed a larger target, correct? Probably best not to attack a warship with even a modest amount of AAA on board.

PBY's to learn the torpedo attack trade against merchant vessel, with (hopefully) less fire power?

PBYs earned their Black Cat name by conducting night attacks. Especially after they got radar. I sadly doubt that any of the Albacores in Singapore had ASV radar, might be interesting to see if American MK XIIIs would mount on an Albacore.

 

[JWilly48519]

If extra sets existed, they should have gone into PBYs. Nothing made a long range search plane more useful than a 10x wider search track, plus ability to see through darkness and clouds, plus some ability to avoid patrolling enemy fighters.

 

[Sekhmet_D]

PBY's weren't particularly nimble and formed a larger target, correct? Probably best not to attack a warship with even a modest amount of AAA on board.

PBY's to learn the torpedo attack trade against merchant vessel, with (hopefully) less fire power?

PBYs earned their Black Cat name by conducting night attacks. Especially after they got radar. I sadly doubt that any of the Albacores in Singapore had ASV radar, might be interesting to see if American MK XIIIs would mount on an Albacore.

If extra sets existed, they should have gone into PBYs. Nothing made a long range search plane more useful than a 10x wider search track, plus ability to see through darkness and clouds, plus some ability to avoid patrolling enemy fighters.

It should be noted that IJNAF fighters had no true capability of performing successful nighttime interceptions prior to 1943. And Japanese flak, both ship and land based, was pretty iffy at the best of times. Nocturnal raids on Lae by B-25 Mitchells went more or less unopposed and deprived the Tainan Kokutai personnel there of much needed sleep.

For all their night fighting prowess, the Japanese Navy would've been totally helpless to defend their ships at sea against a nocturnal radar aided air strike. Bill Richards' successful midnight attack on Akebono Maru (in a radar equipped Catalina, no less) should be regarded as a yardstick for such speculation.

 

[JWilly48519]

How did the night Catalinas actually attack? Did they develop a torpedo solution just based on the radar screen? Seems like that'd be a wild crapshoot.

And counting on being able to see a target in the dark by moonlight and wake phosphorescence, far enough away to develop a torpedo solution, position the aircraft, and drop far enough out for the minimum run for fusing, seems implausible too.

Maybe the flight approached the target ships from astern per the radar track, aircraft in column, and the first plane (presumably with the radar) flew over the target high and "fast" (everything's relative in a Catalina, of course), approximately following the course of the primary target ship, and dropped a string of parachute flares as they passed over. The rest of the planes were approaching at the same altitude, but needed to get down to drop height. When the lead plane signaled to start the run, the rest of the flight would dive to attack altitude to gain some speed, and would separate with maybe odd planes to the left and even planes to the right. Since they were in the dark, it'd be survivable to attack from astern, which would keep the flight together as long as posible since the flare drop plane would need to approach from astern to have the best chance to position the flares optimally. Then as the flares commenced lighting up, each plane would visually select their target, determine what the target was going to do with regard to turning, and make their own run in accord. The natural reaction of the target ship's helm would be to turn one way or the other, since that's the default action when under air attack. With planes approaching from both stern quarters, the odds of at least one of them being able to get a good torpedo solution would be maximized.

 

[alspug]

How did the night Catalinas actually attack? Did they develop a torpedo solution just based on the radar screen? Seems like that'd be a wild crapshoot.

And counting on being able to see a target in the dark by moonlight and wake phosphorescence, far enough away to develop a torpedo solution, position the aircraft, and drop far enough out for the minimum run for fusing, seems implausible too.

Maybe the flight approached the target ships from astern per the radar track, aircraft in column, and the first plane (presumably with the radar) flew over the target high and "fast" (everything's relative in a Catalina, of course), approximately following the course of the primary target ship, and dropped a string of parachute flares as they passed over. The rest of the planes were approaching at the same altitude, but needed to get down to drop height. When the lead plane signaled to start the run, the rest of the flight would dive to attack altitude to gain some speed, and would separate with maybe odd planes to the left and even planes to the right. Since they were in the dark, it'd be survivable to attack from astern, which would keep the flight together as long as posible since the flare drop plane would need to approach from astern to have the best chance to position the flares optimally. Then as the flares commenced lighting up, each plane would visually select their target, determine what the target was going to do with regard to turning, and make their own run in accord. The natural reaction of the target ship's helm would be to turn one way or the other, since that's the default action when under air attack. With planes approaching from both stern quarters, the odds of at least one of them being able to get a good torpedo solution would be maximized.

My very inaccurate understanding of Night Catalina operations are from reading the Blackcats history. Attacks may involve numerous aircraft however trip to and from and over target was alone.

To bomb Japanese troops on islands they looked for camp fires.

For shore installations they used the clear change from ocean or atoll to island.

For night attacks on ships they looked for the wake and then followed it. Night torpedo attacks are rare enough but at night an aircraft hitting the actual target is remote.
A convoy may well get unlucky. What the allies need is some of the Italian circling torpedo's that acted as mobile mines dropped ahead of convoys and warships.

 

[ArtosStark]

How did the night Catalinas actually attack? Did they develop a torpedo solution just based on the radar screen? Seems like that'd be a wild crapshoot.

 

[JWilly48519]

That movie suggested that bombing took place visually, perhaps due to bright moonlight. I'm doubtful if that could be at all correct, because in that much moonlight, AA easily could target very slow Catalinas.

And in any case, that wouldn't explain torpedo attacks, which require determination of target speed and course far enough away that moonlight visibility is even less plausible.

Of course, the movie was produced for home front consumption, and amounted to upbeat propaganda. It would have been technically impossible to make a movie in the dark, where actual night attacks occurred.

 

[Sekhmet_D]

That movie suggested that bombing took place visually, perhaps due to bright moonlight. I'm doubtful if that could be at all correct, because in that much moonlight, AA easily could target very slow Catalinas.

And in any case, that wouldn't explain torpedo attacks, which require determination of target speed and course far enough away that moonlight visibility is even less plausible.

Of course, the movie was produced for home front consumption, and amounted to upbeat propaganda. It would have been technically impossible to make a movie in the dark, where actual night attacks occurred.

In the case of the Akebono Maru attack, ASE radar was used and the Japanese did not notice the PBYs until Bill Richards had released his torpedo (he and his two wingmen chopped their throttles for an almost silent approach). The other two crews attacked while the Japanese were alert and maneuvering, and the AAA went completely wide of the mark. Richards scored the only torpedo hit, while his wingmen damaged a couple other vessels via strafing. All the American aircraft returned home safely.

 

[Butchpfd]

That movie suggested that bombing took place visually, perhaps due to bright moonlight. I'm doubtful if that could be at all correct, because in that much moonlight, AA easily could target very slow Catalinas.

And in any case, that wouldn't explain torpedo attacks, which require determination of target speed and course far enough away that moonlight visibility is even less plausible.

Of course, the movie was produced for home front consumption, and amounted to upbeat propaganda. It would have been technically impossible to make a movie in the dark, where actual night attacks occurred.

True, Also Interestingly enough in the background was a J2F-3 Gruman Duck Amphibian. They were frequently used as SAR and utility aircraft by Navy Patrol wings. PAT WING10 had 5 of them along with an OS2U-3 and 4 or 5 SOC-3/4s as Utility 10. 2 of the J2Fs made it to Java, and later Australia.

 

[jlckansas]

Given the UK's use and experience with ASV radar, they might see the US cobbling something together to be put into the PBY's or even the Devastator TBD that were obsolete as torpedo planes but would work well for surface search.

 

[JWilly48519]

Given the UK's use and experience with ASV radar, they might see the US cobbling something together to be put into the PBY's or even the Devastator TBD that were obsolete as torpedo planes but would work well for surface search.

PBYs from water bases, TBDs from carriers and the few land bases.

Could a TBD, not carrying either torpedoes or bombs, be equipped with drop tanks for extended range?

OTL, American carriers had quite short search range. Roughly doubling their search radius and greatly increasing the search circle for each plane would make carriers much more effective.

And, if a few long-duration planes could be equipped with *aircraft* search radar, one could be kept circulating above the carriers to watch for enemy search planes and incoming strikes. That'd be a *huge* benefit.

 

[Butchpfd]

PBYs from water bases, TBDs from carriers and the few land bases.

Could a TBD, not carrying either torpedoes or bombs, be equipped with drop tanks for extended range?

OTL, American carriers had quite short search range. Roughly doubling their search radius and greatly increasing the search circle for each plane would make carriers much more effective.

And, if a few long-duration planes could be equipped with *aircraft* search radar, one could be kept circulating above the carriers to watch for enemy search planes and incoming strikes. That'd be a *huge* benefit.

PBYs from water bases, TBDs from carriers and the few land bases.

Could a TBD, not carrying either torpedoes or bombs, be equipped with drop tanks for extended range?

OTL, American carriers had quite short search range. Roughly doubling their search radius and greatly increasing the search circle for each plane would make carriers much more effective.

And, if a few long-duration planes could be equipped with *aircraft* search radar, one could be kept circulating above the carriers to watch for enemy search planes and incoming strikes. That'd be a *huge* benefit.

Well, TBDs were stuck with built in tankage. I've never seen reference to any drop tanks, they were pretty much out of service except as Squadron hacks, by the fall of 1942. SBDs search range was 1000 to 1500 miles total, with internal fuel. The TBF/TBM had a recon range of 1400 miles, extendable with bomb bay and wing tanks a range of , 2300 miles. Some Recon and Air Group Command TBFs carried airborne radar from 1943 , some being modern looking Belly domes.