Most successful torpedo attack ever?

[mescal]

Oops, yes.... Taranto...

good point, Kingfish.

the torpedo hit on POLA (although she was only a heavy cruiser), that led to the Italian defeat at Cape Matapan might deserve mention, as well.

I don't know. I've always felt that Matapan has been quite overvalued.
It was a very nice and effective tactical victory, and there may have been a strong psychological impact (on both sides).
But from a cold strategic point of view, it didn't significantly alter the situation in the Med.
The availability of Littorio weighed far more with regard to what Supermarina wanted to do than the three cruisers.

[Rob Stuart]

21 obsolete biplanes attack the Italian Pearl harbor at night and manage to punch holes in 3 battleships, ...

Some of the 21 Swordfish carried bombs or flares instead of torpedoes, so the percentage of torpedoes dropped which were hits must have been quite high - more than 50%, I think.

[Kingfish]

The Bombers didn't do too bad either, hitting a Cruiser and Destroyer but the bombs didn't explode

[JAG13]

Since the scope got so broad then the sinking of HMS Falmouth and Notthingham in August 1916 convinced the RN not to go after the KM unless they got close to, what were in practice, Scottish waters.

[Carl Schwamberger]

What might have been the most sucessfull sortie where torpedos were used? I'm inclined to think either a US submarine in the Pacifc, or one of the German during Op. Drumbeat?

[jwsleser]

This is in response to the thread question. I am not sure if this fits Carl's question.

I have seen two types of responses. The first is tactical (how much was sunk), the other operational (what was affected by the attack).

My answer is generally in the area of the latter. The torpedo attack of the Nachi and Haguro at the battle of the Java Sea.

The launch was at night at longer range. The attack sank two light cruisers, the De Ruyter and Java. This attack turned a battle that was, at that moment in time a draw, into an operational win. The result caused the ABDA to abandon Java and the break-up of the naval Strike Force, which in-turn resulted in the loss of the Exeter, Houston, Perth, Encounter, Pope, and Evertsen as they tried to escape.

In terms of overall effect, this one torpedo attack was decisive far in excess of the tactical results. As was mentioned in the post on Matapan, the loss of three Italian cruisers didn't change much. The torpedo attack north of Java basically gutted the naval defense of the island, and damage the morale of the defenders to a great extent.

Just my input.

Pista! Jeff

[Carl Schwamberger]

Jeff, It fits. The question could be answered in simple terms of tonnage as well. I'd welcome multiple answers.

Another might be the unsucessful attack by the Nautalus near Midway island, which led to the detached destroyer, which led the dive bombers squadron to the aircraft carriers. I dont know if the squadron leaders decisions of where to search would have led so cant say if the sumbmarines effort was decisive or not....

[Kingfish]

Jeff, It fits. The question could be answered in simple terms of tonnage as well. I'd welcome multiple answers.

Another might be the unsucessful attack by the Nautalus near Midway island, which led to the detached destroyer, which led the dive bombers squadron to the aircraft carriers. I dont know if the squadron leaders decisions of where to search would have led so cant say if the sumbmarines effort was decisive or not....

It was because the lone destroyer's course and speed confirmed the hunch Wade McClusky had about the location of the IJN fleet. Note that following the strike several Enterprise dive bombers had to ditch due to fuel shortages. This indicates they flew well past their normal combat range. Had Nautilus not been there, Arashi would not have diverted and then tried to catch up, and McClusky would probably had turned around when he reached the limit of his combat range.

[Carl Schwamberger]

Jeff, It fits. The question could be answered in simple terms of tonnage as well. I'd welcome multiple answers.

Another might be the unsucessful attack by the Nautalus near Midway island, which led to the detached destroyer, which led the dive bombers squadron to the aircraft carriers. I dont know if the squadron leaders decisions of where to search would have led so cant say if the sumbmarines effort was decisive or not....

It was because the lone destroyer's course and speed confirmed the hunch Wade McClusky had about the location of the IJN fleet. Note that following the strike several Enterprise dive bombers had to ditch due to fuel shortages. This indicates they flew well past their normal combat range. Had Nautilus not been there, Arashi would not have diverted and then tried to catch up, and McClusky would probably had turned around when he reached the limit of his combat range.

So, without getting any hits the Nautalus sinks four carriers. Not bad

[ChristopherPerrien]

Jeff, It fits. The question could be answered in simple terms of tonnage as well. I'd welcome multiple answers.

Another might be the unsucessful attack by the Nautalus near Midway island, which led to the detached destroyer, which led the dive bombers squadron to the aircraft carriers. I dont know if the squadron leaders decisions of where to search would have led so cant say if the sumbmarines effort was decisive or not....

It was because the lone destroyer's course and speed confirmed the hunch Wade McClusky had about the location of the IJN fleet. Note that following the strike several Enterprise dive bombers had to ditch due to fuel shortages. This indicates they flew well past their normal combat range. Had Nautilus not been there, Arashi would not have diverted and then tried to catch up, and McClusky would probably had turned around when he reached the limit of his combat range.

So, without getting any hits the Nautalus sinks four carriers. Not bad

It is funny how the "submarine-cruisers" of all other nations were so mediocre and the idea of sub-cruisers was considered an over-all failure. That is, until you look at the astounding combat records of the true US V-series- V-4, V-5, V-6, Argonaut, Narwhal, Nautilus.

Taking those three subs( and maybe even with the V-7 Dolphin ) as the "class" of war-service boats of the V series, they argueably may well be the most successful sub class ever built.


As to tonnage sunk, Pearl Harbor?

[ChristopherPerrien]

As to tonnage actually "destroyed" in one attack, that record would belong to the USS Archerfish.