dam busters

Torpedos were thought of first, by both sides. So, the Jerries rigged
effective anti-torpedo nets in front of their dams, rendering the torpedo
threat moot. Enter Barnes Wallace....

nt (Krztalizer) wrote in message ...
Torpedos were thought of first, by both sides. So, the Jerries rigged
effective anti-torpedo nets in front of their dams, rendering the torpedo
threat moot. Enter Barnes Wallace....


Didn't the US Navy use Skyraiders (AD-2s or -4s, I believe) to
successfully torpedo a dam in North Korea during that war?

Guess the NKs didn't read RAM...

Kirk

Didn't the US Navy use Skyraiders (AD-2s or -4s, I believe) to
successfully torpedo a dam in North Korea during that war?

those rice-paper torpedo nets were surprisingly effective during testing, but
failed miserably in operational use.

Guess the NKs didn't read RAM...

They get their info from Channel Only One; "All the news you'll ever get to
hear".

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR

Donate your memories - write a note on the back and send your old photos to a
reputable museum, don't take them with you when you're gone.

Kirk Stant wrote:
nt (Krztalizer) wrote in message
...
Torpedos were thought of first, by both sides. So, the Jerries rigged
effective anti-torpedo nets in front of their dams, rendering the torpedo
threat moot. Enter Barnes Wallace....


Didn't the US Navy use Skyraiders (AD-2s or -4s, I believe) to
successfully torpedo a dam in North Korea during that war?

Yep. Here's a photograph:
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/i...00/g428678.jpg

Apparently they blew off one floodgate and damaged another.

The dam, however, remained intact.

-Marc

--
Marc Reeve
actual email address after removal of 4s & spaces is
c4m4r4a4m4a4n a4t c4r4u4z4i4o d4o4t c4o4m

(Marc Reeve) wrote in message
Apparently they blew off one floodgate and damaged another.

The dam, however, remained intact.

-Marc

Nice photo. The gates were the targets, not the dam itself.

Rich

From: (Rich)
Date: 2/19/2004 6:08 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Marc Reeve) wrote in message
Apparently they blew off one floodgate and damaged another.

The dam, however, remained intact.

-Marc

Nice photo. The gates were the targets, not the dam itself.

Rich

Hey, watch the dam language.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

(Rich) wrote in message . com...
(Marc Reeve) wrote in message
Apparently they blew off one floodgate and damaged another.

The dam, however, remained intact.

-Marc

Nice photo. The gates were the targets, not the dam itself.

Rich

from my post of 15 Oct 02

Eight AD-4 Skyraiders from the USS Princeton (CV-37), 5 from VA-195
and 3 from VC-35, led by Cdr R.C. Merrick (CAG19) carrying Mk 13
aerial torpedoes were launched on 1 May 1951 to attack the Hwachon
dam. They were escorted by 12 F4U-4 Corsairs from VF-192 and VF-193
armed with VT fuzed bombs for suppression. The attack began at
approximately 1130 hours (local) with the Corsairs making their
suppression runs. The Skyraiders made their attacks in pairs. All
eight torpedoes were dropped. One ran erratic; one was a dud. The
remaining six hit their intended target, the dam's sluice gates,
destroying one and putting a ten-foot hole in a second.

The attack was made because of 8th Army's concerns that the CCF would
be able to control the depth on the Pukhan and Han Rivers ... opening
the sluice gates and flooding the rivers t protect themselves ...
closing the gates and lowering river levels to facilitate their own
attacks.

8th Army had faced the situation before. In January ‘51 attacks by
USAF B-29's failed to damage the sluice gates. Although another
strike was requested, Far East AF considered the dam to be impervious
and rejected the request. In early April, 8th Army's concerns became
real when the CCF opened the sluice gates and flooded the Pukhan
River, raising the water level several feet within one hour, washing
away one engineer bridge and damaging another. On April 16th, 8th
Army captured the dam, but engineers were unable to jam it's sluice
gates open. The CCF counterattacked in force and 8th army forces
driven away from the reservoir.

On 30 April six AD-4's from VA-195 had tried to take out the sluice
gates with 2000 lb bombs. While blasting a hole in the dam, they were
unable to damage the sluice gates. The attack of 1 May was the
successful follow up to that day's disappointment. VA-195 proudly
carries the name ‘Dambusters' as a result of this action.

Regards,

Rich


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Google Home - - Business Solutions - Services & Tools - Jobs, Press, &
Help

©2004 Google

Because the germans had put torpedo nets, either that or the RAF had thought
that torpedo nets would be there, he needed the bomb to hit the wall, then
sink to a certain depth before exploding, the idea being that the explosion
itself wouldnt actually burst the dam but it would cause lets say a space,
where the explosion was, and the water pressure as it took up the space
would do the damage., to do this, the bomb had to actually be ON the wall,
and by it hitting the wall at above the surface then sinking down the wall
this could be achieved.
"Hamisha3" wrote in message
...
Not to take anything away from BarnesWallis but why does a simple torpedo
not
do the same as the boune bomb, detonate against the dam wall at a pre
set
depth?

Thanks in advance
H.

If you watch the 1953? film it pretty much explains the reasoning behind the
bomb, the torpedo nets plus they needed a minimum of 5000lb of high
explosives to have a chance of breaching the dams. In an interview given by
Wallace he stated that his famous 10 & 5 ton "Grandslam" an Tallboy bombs
were originally considered but would only work with a direct hit, any sort
of near miss would do no damge because of the water cushioning effect.
Interestingly the scale model dam used by wallace complete with test
blast damage still exists in the Grounds of the UK Building Research
Establishment in Hertfordshire just out side Watford in the UK.

Myc

Mycroft wrote:

If you watch the 1953? film it pretty much explains the reasoning behind the
bomb, the torpedo nets plus they needed a minimum of 5000lb of high
explosives to have a chance of breaching the dams. In an interview given by
Wallace he stated that his famous 10 & 5 ton "Grandslam" an Tallboy bombs
were originally considered but would only work with a direct hit, any sort
of near miss would do no damge because of the water cushioning effect.
Interestingly the scale model dam used by wallace complete with test
blast damage still exists in the Grounds of the UK Building Research
Establishment in Hertfordshire just out side Watford in the UK.

Myc

Just a nitpick.......

It's Barnes Wallis - Wallace was the guy played by Mel Gibson in Braveheart
!!!!!!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++