View Single Post
  #17 (permalink)  
Old January 6th, 2008, 08:42 AM
Tony Williams Tony Williams is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 273
Tony Williams has a spectacular aura aboutTony Williams has a spectacular aura about
Default Re: Torpedo Bombers and Dive Bombers - Which Worked Better?

I believe that few, if any, WW2 battleships were sunk by bombs alone, with the exception of the Roma which was hit by the huge radio-controlled FX-1400 bombs, and of course the stationary Tirpitz, capsized by enormous "earthquake" bombs.

As has already been pointed out, to sink a ship you need to let the water in, and that means making big holes in the hull below water level. That's exactly what torpedoes are designed to do, but I don't believe that dive-bombers were capable of carrying bombs heavy enough to inflict this on a well-protected modern battleship. They could make one heck of a mess of such a ship, but were unlikely to sink it.
__________________
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website
Reply With Quote