The role of Aircraft in WW1?

Now that is a good theme for an 'Alternative History'!

 

There was a successful aerial torpedo attack made against a Turkish freighter, but it was not done by a Sopwith Cuckoo. It was, in fact, done with a seaplane; however, I can't recall what type. Perhaps it was a Sopwith seaplane?

 

You can only wonder what effect it would have had only post war thinking if torpedo armed aircraft had managed to sink something of cruiser size or bigger under combat conditions. Certainly the major navies of the world would have looked very different.

 

The admirals would have freaked, most of them, and dug in their heels even deeper. Look at what happened with the submarine: Despite what the U-boats had done to Britain's merchant fleet in WW1, Germany was allowed in 1935 to start building them again. This was because the Brits had developed Asdic (sonar), and they felt that the menace was ended. And we all know just how good a decision that turned out to be! And the aircraft carrier was deemed to be a secondary type of vessel until Taranto and Pearl Harbor showed what they could do.

 

Yeah, but if a Taranto-style attack had happened in WW1...

Yes, I know, the Admirals would have cried 'foul', made a bundle of excuses (probably blaming the Army / Air Force defenses of the port), but they might at least have started hanging more guns on their ships.
Oh, hang on, Taranto proves nothing. In the minds of inter-war Admirals, achored ships are easy targets for anything, even such un-gentlemanly devices as submarines & aircraft. a ship under way, at sea, can effortlessly shoot down any plane, and dodge the bombs of those it misses.
Mitchell? Well, the ships he sunk were stationary, and not shooting back.
Just like that unlucky Turkish freighter.

It too Prince of Wales & Repulse (was it Repulse, it is too early in the morning... Reliant?) going down to change that mindset.

 

It was Repulse. I too have a problem remembering which one it was, I confuse Repulse to its sister, Renown.

 

Can it? Bear in mind WW1 warships didn't have proper AA guns so their going to struggle to shoot down aircraft.

On the other hand by the end of WW1 for aircraft to sink a battleship under combat conditions, would probably require a single battleship to be struck several times. Given the likely small scale of an aircraft strike at this time (probably less than ten planes) the chances of landing multiple hits would be small. However anything up to armoured cruiser sized would be a different ball game. Vessels of this size were sunk during the course of the war by single torpedos.

Should aircraft sink a large surface warship in open water this will prove the aircraft as a ship killer concept in a way that Mitchell's publicity stunt could never do.

 

No!!
But, "In the minds of inter-war Admirals" this is so.
Had a Prince of Wales & Repulse equivalent happened in WW1, then maybe people would sit up & notice.

Between the wars RN exercises were carefully conducted with rules in place to effectively neutralise all Submarine & Aerial effectiveness (except as scouts & spotters for the main fleet). :roll:

 

Well I stand corrected on just about everything other than the divebomber, unless anyone else knows otherwise...

Overall I still stand by what I said originally, I think the events of WWII were more long lasting in terms of air power as this was the time it really came of age, and the misconceptions of the Great War and interwar years were thoroughly disproved.

Thanks for the info regarding the Torpedo bombing, you know I really didn't think a WWI plane would have been capable of carrying and delivering an aerial Torpedo, to be honest I didn't think it would have even occured to most WWI senior officers to have even tried it!

 

Remember that the fleet lost control of the FAA for most of the interwar period. Would you place great reliance on a section of your command you didn't have proper control over.

Really until well into the thirties the ability of aircraft to sink battleships is at best dubious.

For their part subs are difficult to use in fleet actions due to their slow speed under water. A sub stands its best chance against a battleship when said battleship is plodding along fat and happy at cruising speed. Once a battleship is thundering alone at full speed a sub generally won't be able to get into position.

 

Well, being as many WW1 planes tended to shed their wings in a prolonged steep dive, I think divebombing was not really a serious option back then. :roll:
Unless you try something a little similar to the 'Aphrodite', loading your plane up with explosives, dive it at the target, wait for the wings to leave, then bail out. However, this would require both a large shift in behoaviour from the commanders & the pilots, and the issue of parachutes!

 

Unless you were in a hurry to explore the possibilities of an afterlife.




Nobody take that as a cue to turn this into a discussion about God.

 

Don't worry, Ebar, I won't. I recognize a rhetorical statement (and a good one, at that) when I see one.

 

No, it was done by a Short Type 184. It could be argued how successful the attack was, however, the 5000 ton Turkish freighter had already been immobilised by a British submarine a few days earlier. Type 184s scored hits on two other Turkish ships as well, but failed to sink them.

 

There seems to be some confusion over whether or not an aircraft managed to sink something by torpedoing. I've looked around and various sites seem to be saying that a Short 184 did attack and sink a Turkish tug boat. However one source I came across said the plane was sitting on the surface at the time and had to get rid of the torpedo to get airborne again.


In the anti ship role the Short 184 was hampered by it's small torpedo size (a single 14" torp) which probably wasn't capable of sinking a warship. The Cuckoo on the other hand had an 18" weapon and would have been far more feasible.

Had the Cuckoo entered service 6 months early I think there would have been a real chance for seeing at least a small surface warship get sunk by air launched torpedoes.

 

Or even a carrier raid on Kiel, eh? Using FURIOUS and ARGUS?