| Author |
Topic: Loading Torrpedos in Tubs. |
|
Frank Andruss
TOP BOSS
|
  
 Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 1:33am
|
That triangular plate on the front sure looks like it is welded into place, which in my opinion looks more like the torpedo cover.
|
Total Posts: 3964 | Joined:
Feb 9, 2007 - 11:41am | IP
Logged
|
|
PeterTareBuilder2
MASTER
|
Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 1:48am
|
Quote:
That triangular plate on the front sure looks like it is welded into place, which in my opinion looks more like the torpedo cover.
|
|
Hi Frank.
Here's my take - for whatever it's worth.
I blew up the image to 400% and what I see are two cables. Theres a lower transverse cable running across the triangular metal piece with two holes near its bottom through which the transverse cable goes. At the apex of that triangular metal piece is another hole that appears to line up with the horizontal ring on tthe torpedo visible in the image and a vertical cable is through both of those holes. The three cable ends appear to be fastened to the forward face of the torpedo tube by a U-shackle on top of the tube, a U-shackle on the starboard lower side of the tube front and a captive ring on the port lower side of the tube front.
That's what I think I'm seeing in that image = an inverted wire cable Y harness that holds the torpedo inside the tube until the Inverted Y harness is removed as the torpedo is readied for combat.
Also, if you look closely at the edge of the torpedo you can see an area of shadow cast on the torpefo by the torpedo tube.
In the upper port quadrant between 12 o'clock and 1 o'clock on the front of the tube you can see what appears to be grease too.
Cheers
"Give me a fast boat for we want to get out of harm's way too." |
Total Posts: 204 | Joined:
Dec 8, 2012 - 6:03pm | IP
Logged
|
|
Jeff D
Moderator
|
Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 3:01am
|
I agree Peter, looks like a retainer to me. Here's a higher quality closeup from a photo scan:
|
Total Posts: 2200 | Joined:
Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am | IP
Logged
|
|
David Waples
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 5:03am
|
I'm guessing this is a warhead too. But I would like to see something more conclusive.
Jeff's fantasy bikini plate is definitely a retaining plate and in my opinion not welded to the warhead or cover. The top wire is disconnected and it falls down allowing the torpedo to exit the tube. If that were a cover attached to the triangular plate it would not allow enough room for the torpedo to exit the tube. If this were a cover not attached to the triangular retaining plate there's nothing to grab on to so that you could remove it. More evidence that this is a warhead we're looking at.
Thanks for blowing up the photo. I've pointed out that you can see a round disc shaped area behind the triangular retaining plate. To me this looks like where the ring is attached. As mentioned in the photo there's no other way to remove the torpedo from the tube.
I think this is pretty good evidence this is a warhead. If it's a warhead, is it natural bronze as we see in the color photo of the 109? Or is it painted?
David Waples |
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined:
Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm | IP
Logged
|
|
David Buck
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 5:18am
|
Hi Jerry Try Pratice Warheads and Live Warheads, thats the terms the Aussie Army use.
D.buck |
Total Posts: 332 | Joined:
May 4, 2008 - 2:59am | IP
Logged
|
|
 |
Will Day |
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 9:31am
|
Hey Jer; I think the real hardcore PT men called it a "torpedo thingy". . .
Will |
Total Posts: 1955 | Joined:
Oct 8, 2006 - 4:19pm | IP
Logged
|
|
Drew Cook
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 3:01pm
|
Personally, I'm quite positive we're looking at the actual torpedo warhead in the photo of the 149 in which the torpedoman is cranking the tube out into firing position.
The triangular metal "bra" is just a retaining plate held in place with thin wire cables.
I'd thought this was a well-known and obvious fact, particularly since the Italeri PT 109 kit has torpedo warheads with these devices molded into them.
The best example(s) of the smooth, featureless warheads I've seen in photos are the bronze ones seen on (what we speculate may be the 109) the boat moored to starboard of the 61 in the Ken Prescott color photos.
I'll try to look through my PT literature to find other photos of ringless or nipple-less warheads.
|
Total Posts: 1306 | Joined:
Oct 19, 2006 - 10:44am | IP
Logged
|
|
Bob Butler
MASTER
|
Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 5:33pm
|
It is my understanding thet the 109 kit comes with two different typs of torpedo tube covers that were removed when on patrol, I think that is what you guys are looking at. Here is a photo of a damaged warhead , Although different the ring is on the warhead.
Photo 15-3: View showing damage sustained by torpedo warhead on Gato (SS212) as the result of a close depth charge explosion aft in her action of 1 April 1943. Torpedo was stowed in an after tube, with the tube flooded and outer door closed.
|
Total Posts: 192 | Joined:
Mar 23, 2013 - 11:58am | IP
Logged
|
|
 |
Jerry Gilmartin |
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 7:03pm
|
Hi Bob.
That photo is showing the closeup of a warhead from a Mark 14 torpedo not a Mark 8. The Mark 8 was developed in 1922 for destroyers and surface ships and the Mark 14 was developed in the late 1930's exclusively for submarines. I dont believe the submariners would have been given the obsolete Mark 8 to use in their torpedo tubes unless something really was out of whack! The Mark 13 torpedoes that we have on the PT658 have a similar nose ring to this photo however. Just for what it is worth. Jerry
Jerry Gilmartin |
Total Posts: 1472 | Joined:
Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm | IP
Logged
|
|
Bob Butler
MASTER
|
Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 7:52pm
|
The point I was trying to make is there were rings in live warheads, even though this was different.
|
Total Posts: 192 | Joined:
Mar 23, 2013 - 11:58am | IP
Logged
|
|
