khai@uunet.UU.NET (S. Khai Mong) (11/22/89)
From: amara!khai@uunet.UU.NET (S. Khai Mong) I was wondering whether they still make torpedoes which are designed to be carried by planes. I assume that they are no longer made since I rarely read about it. If so, would anybody like to discuss why not? [mod.note: They still use them, but only in ASW, I think. - Bill ] It seems as if antiship missiles have more or less displaced them. Antiship missiles seem to be cheaper, simpler and more accurate than torpedoes. They are also easier to deliver since they have a much greater range than torpedoes. On the other hand, antiship missiles have nowhere near the destructive power of torpedoes. During WWII, a torpedo hit was usually quite a disabling blow for most ships if not fatal, whereas aerial bombs were less destructive. A torpedo with a good homing mechanism is also a lot more immune to close-in defensive weapons since detection and accurate location would be a lot more difficult. It would seem that the best approach would be to have a hybrid technology. For the initial flight, have a cruise-missile like capability, and then duck into the water to hit the target. [mod.note II (Son of Mod.note): What you've described is ASROC, an antisubmarine weapon fo the US Navy. - Bill ] -- Sao Khai Mong: Applied Dynamics, 3800 Stone School Road, Ann Arbor, Mi48108 (313)973-1300 (uunet|sharkey)!amara!khai khai%amara.uucp@mailgw.cc.umich.edu
terryr@ogccse.ogc.edu (Terry Rooker) (11/24/89)
From: terryr@ogccse.ogc.edu (Terry Rooker) In article <11649@cbnews.ATT.COM> amara!khai@uunet.UU.NET (S. Khai Mong) writes: > > >From: amara!khai@uunet.UU.NET (S. Khai Mong) > >I was wondering whether they still make torpedoes which are designed >to be carried by planes. I assume that they are no longer made since I >rarely read about it. If so, would anybody like to discuss why not? > >[mod.note: They still use them, but only in ASW, I think. - Bill ] Nobody is still currently making torpedo planes to attack surface vessels. I believe that there are still older aircraft designs that at one time had the capability, but it is not practical anymore. I remember watching some fact filled show recently (it may have been the Great Wall of Iron in which case the country in question would be China) that one of the more isolated communist countries still had torpedo bomber squadrons. Bill is right that the only aerial tordepoes currently around are ASW weapons. As for the demise of torpedo bombers, they are a weapon system that requires near optimal conditions. During WWII most of the aerial torpedo attacks against any serious opposition were not successful. Most of the difficulty is in the interaction between torpdeoes and airplanes. Torpedoes require precise heading information, and use a gyroscope that must be aligned and stabilized. Aircraft on the other hand have much less precise requirements. Consequently, the torpedo plane must fly low and slow and straight for an agonizingly long time before it can launch the torpedo. During that run in, it is a surprisingly good target. Modern technology could speed up the process, but even with guided torpedoes the plane would have to close within several miles of the target. >It seems as if antiship missiles have more or less displaced them. >Antiship missiles seem to be cheaper, simpler and more accurate than >torpedoes. They are also easier to deliver since they have a much >greater range than torpedoes. On the other hand, antiship missiles >have nowhere near the destructive power of torpedoes. During WWII, a >torpedo hit was usually quite a disabling blow for most ships if not >fatal, whereas aerial bombs were less destructive. A torpedo with a >good homing mechanism is also a lot more immune to close-in defensive >weapons since detection and accurate location would be a lot more >difficult. It would seem that the best approach would be to have a >hybrid technology. For the initial flight, have a cruise-missile like >capability, and then duck into the water to hit the target. First, if a torpedo is designed only for surface ship attack it can be made cheaper. If nothing else, a ship cannot manuver in three dimensions, or hide beneath the inversion layer. Second, there is only one weapon I'm aware of that is a rocket propelled torpedo with an anti-ship capability. Most rocket assisted torpedoes are ASW weapons, such as ASROC, or Ikara. The Soviet SSN-10/14 is rumored to have the capability to also attack ships. Considering the confusion surounding this weapon, I can only call any information about it rumors. I'm sure that someone somewhere knows the real capabilities, but information published in open sources has been contradictory. When the weapon was first seen (on a Krivak I) it was believed to be an SSM and designated the SSN-10. Later on, several contradictions and I vaguely remember there was a sighting of the actual air vehicle caused a re-evaluation of the weapon. The major contradiction was that the Krivak was classified as an ASW vessel, but had no major ASW weapons. It was then decided that the weapon was a winged rocket assited torpedo, and designated the SSN-14. Some articles claim that the new designation was simply to save face. Others claim that 2 different weapons can be launched from the same launcher. The general consensus is that the SSN-14 is a rocket powered torpedo, and that it can be used against surface ships. Try it sometime in a modern naval minatures game. For the reasons outlined above it can be very effective. Terry Rooker terryr@cse.ogc.edu