Tirbute to the Mighty Stringbag!

RE: Tirbute to the Mighty Stringbag!

Ant, you have some really good points there. The Swordfish, despite its limitations was arguably the most successful torpedo bomber of the war. It’s replacements were largely failures.

And sorry about that last picture being an Albacore. I wasn’t paying attention I suppose when I posted it.

RE: Tirbute to the Mighty Stringbag!

Hi folks,
I’m not sure I agree with the accusation about the pre-war FAA’s incompetence in aquiring the Swordfish and/or failing to replace it sooner.The Swordfish was designed and built in the early 30’s when the trend in military aircraft was very much with biplanes.This was especially true for Naval aeroplanes because biplanes had lower take off and landing speeds,making them ideal for carrier ops.When you consider the conditions that the Swordfish were operating under in the pursuit for the Bismarck for example,you have to wonder whether a faster and more complex monoplane would’ve been capable of operating,and the same applies for operations in defence of arctic convoys.Simpler was better under some conditions.Even the monoplane torpedo bombers of the same period could be pretty poor,the Douglas TBD Devestator being a prime example.
True,there were certain areas where the Stringbag was lacking,but generally it was a machine the crews loved.Torpedo bombers always had high loss rates due to the nature of thier role,as demonstrated by the mauling of Grumman Avengers at Midway,even though the Avenger was probably the best Allied monoplane torpedo bomber of the war.
Incidentally,the lowest pic in the initial post seems to show an Albacore taking-off rather than a Sworfish.

RE: Tirbute to the Mighty Stringbag!

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 12-01-03 AT 12:08 PM (GMT)]I’m afraid that the Swordfish is, for me, a flying reminder of the incompetence of British military aviation procurement management throughout the last century.

That the men of the FAA were expected to fight in such an antiquated machine by their lords and masters still beggars belief. Their magnificent acheivements were out of proportion to the capabilities of the aircraft.

RE: Tirbute to the Mighty Stringbag!

Watch out for a BBC Documentary soon (don’t know when) but the wreck of the WW2 Ark Royal has been found and filmed; as were half a dozen Swordfishes which had slid off the deck when she sank.
(also spare a thought today for the current Ark Royal that sails from Portsmouth into who knows what)

RE: Tirbute to the Mighty Stringbag!

Supposedly, the guns on the Bismarck weren’t designed to compensate for the slow speeds that the Swordfish made their attacks at. This allowed them to get in and drop their torpedoes without being shot down. Quite an interesting little tidbit if you ask me.

RE: Tirbute to the Mighty Stringbag!

That’s the problem.

The poor old Stringbag, mighty though it was had no glamour whatsoever.

Yet when you look at its list of campaign triumphs it just has to be one of the most effective aircraft of the war.

Bismark, the Italian Fleet at Taranto, a good few U-boats, the recce work off Malta etc etc.

Wonder what would have been achieved by something a bit more up-to-the-minute? Or was its very slowness the secret of its success.

Moggy

Remember Lt-Cdr Esmonde and his men though.

RE: Tirbute to the Mighty Stringbag!

I’m rather shocked that no one put down any remarks. Perhaps I need more/better pictures?