The PT Boat Forum
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboard.cgi


Forum Category: PT Boats of WWII
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboard.cgi?cid=101&fct=showf


Forum Name: PT Boats - General
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboard.cgi?fct=gotoforum&cid=101&fid=102


Topic: Loading Torrpedos in Tubs.
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboardr.cgi?cid=101&fid=102&tid=3153



I doing my model with the covers off the tubs. I'm using the Italeri Mk VIII's. On the tip of the torpedos there is a ring, does the ring. come off and a fuse screw in, Or is the ring part of the fuse. If so is there any up and down or lert or right. for the position of this ring after it's placed in the tub?



Posted By: Bob Butler | Posted on: Apr 22, 2013 - 10:01pm
Total Posts: 192 | Joined: Mar 23, 2013 - 11:58am



Ring is replaced with a fuse. Fuse is a totally separate piece from the ring.

Cheers

"Give me a fast boat for we want to get out of harm's way too."

Posted By: PeterTareBuilder2 | Posted on: Apr 22, 2013 - 10:45pm
Total Posts: 204 | Joined: Dec 8, 2012 - 6:03pm



Hi guys,
I think you have the entire concept wrong. The Ring is welded to the front. The Mark 8 torpedo does not have a "Fuse" like a aerial bomb would. It is properly called an "Exploder Assembly" and it is installed up inside of a void space on the bottom of the warhead about a foot back from the nose. From the outside of the torpedo the Exploder appears like an oval shaped plate attached to the underside of the warhead. The Exploder contains a small paddlewheel that is turned by the torpedoes forward motion through the water to arm the Detonator. (I think Jack Duncan calculated it was a couple of hundred yards). The paddlewheel cocks a hold back lever and a spring loaded hammer. When the torpedo hits up against something, a weighted ring (called a trigger ring or flop ring) moves and pushes up against a trigger plate. The trigger plate then pushes up on the mushroom cap. The mushroom cap has an internal trough that allows spring loaded "detent" balls to push out and release the spring loaded hammer. The hammer has two firing pins that penetrate two matching primer caps. The primer caps burst into flame and set off the dime sized Fulminate of Mercury Detonator, the detonator then sets off the Tetryl Booster Charge (about the same size as a can of Vienna Sausages) The Tetryl Booster charge then sets of the main TNT or Torpex Charge and the warhead explodes. Got all that?
By the way, I got all this information from the book "US Naval Ordinance" dated 1944, and also from the Mark 13 torpedo technical manual, The Exploder Mechanism, Mark 4 was developed in 1923 and was not subject to the same problems as the later Mark 6 Exploder used on submarine Mark 14 torpedoes.

I have a photograph of this Exploder Mechanism somewhere on Photobucket and will try to post it later.

The Ring on the front is usually welded to the outer casing of the warhead and is used for lifting either the entire torpedo after it is assembled, or just the warhead by itself. I dont think it can move to the right or to the left or up and down.

Jerry Gilmartin

Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Apr 23, 2013 - 2:20pm
Total Posts: 1230 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm



Thanks Jerry, when the torpedo is in the tube and your looking at it, would the ring be up and down , sideways or etc. I'm refering to the position of the torpedo in the tube. does it matter or can it be laying any which way. or is there a proper way of putting it in and would all the rings be in the same position.



Posted By: Bob Butler | Posted on: Apr 23, 2013 - 5:18pm
Total Posts: 192 | Joined: Mar 23, 2013 - 11:58am



Hi Bob,
Ok yes, I am pretty positive the main axis of the lifting ring would be in the vertical plane. That way the bending stress is spread out better when it is being used to lift the torpedo.
Jerry

Jerry Gilmartin

Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Apr 23, 2013 - 5:56pm
Total Posts: 1230 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm




Thanks Jerry, when the torpedo is in the tube and your looking at it, would the ring be up and down , sideways or etc. I'm refering to the position of the torpedo in the tube. does it matter or can it be laying any which way. or is there a proper way of putting it in and would all the rings be in the same position.



Yes, it definitely matters. There are guides inside both types of tubes (MK18, MK19). Go here and read chapter 6. [url]http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ref/PT-Manual/MTBM-2.html#C6[/url]

Al Ross



Posted By: alross2 | Posted on: Apr 23, 2013 - 6:57pm
Total Posts: 906 | Joined: Oct 30, 2006 - 8:19pm



Hi Bob,
I found those photos on Photobucket. I will post them here. In them you can see the diagram for the exploder and the photos of loading an old Mk8 torpedo on board Ted Berlins PT167 in Rendova. In one you can see the ring that is welded to the nose of the torpedo warhead. It has a tagline tied to it to guide the torpedo as it is being lifted by the crane. You can see the orientation of the ring as well. Just as an aside, this is a Practice dummy warhead as indicated by the yellow color and the two round access plate covers on the top of the warhead. I hope these are helpful. Jerry

Exploder operating diagram


Explanation of operating diagram



Loading onto PT167



On a cart



Loading onto PT167 showing nose ring orientation




Loading onto PT167



View of old Mk8 being lifted at Rendova view of bottom side of warhead possibly can see exploder mech



PT fires practice torpedo off Rendova note orientation of nose ring
PTfirespracticetorpedonearrendovaJan44pt2.jpg" border="0">

Firing practice torpedo

PTfirespracticetorpedonearrendovaJan44pt1.jpg" border="0">

Locating the spent practice torpedo



Towing the torpedo by the nose ring back to Rendova



I hope this clarifys what I am talking about. Jerry

Jerry Gilmartin

Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Apr 24, 2013 - 1:42pm
Total Posts: 1230 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm



Good deal THANK YOU!, so much.



Posted By: Bob Butler | Posted on: Apr 24, 2013 - 5:25pm
Total Posts: 192 | Joined: Mar 23, 2013 - 11:58am



Great sequence of photos, Jer.

Will

Posted By: Will Day | Posted on: Apr 24, 2013 - 8:48pm
Total Posts: 1909 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 4:19pm



I have seen photos of Mk. VIII torpedoes without rings on the nose. I'll hunt around and see if I can find some. Any thoughts about that???
Dave

David Waples

Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Apr 24, 2013 - 9:37pm
Total Posts: 1615 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm



Hi Dave,
Maybe the practice heads had rings and warshot warheads did not? I am not really sure. Perhaps some versions were set up with a detachable ring?, like they screwed in? It would be interesting to see these photos if you can locate them. I tell ya, learn something new every day around here!
Jerry

Jerry Gilmartin

Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Apr 25, 2013 - 12:02am
Total Posts: 1230 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm



Hey Guys, I spoke with Mr. Herb Jenne, TM/2c who served with Ron 24. he said he remembers seeing the ring on the dummy warheads only. They used the ring to tie onto when pulling the torpedoes after they were fired. Hope this helps some.



Posted By: Frank Andruss | Posted on: Apr 25, 2013 - 1:43am
Total Posts: 3964 | Joined: Feb 9, 2007 - 11:41am



I've seen too many photos of torpedoes with rings on them. I know I've seen photos of the warheads with a round plate with lots of holes around the perimeter of the plate. Same size as the one with the ring on it.

I'm curious about the photos of the tubes with the retaining systems. Is this a cover over the tube or is there no ring? It has to be one or the other. This is key because I need to figure out if I'm going with a bronze warhead or a painted tube cover. Look at the following pictures. The one in color clearly shows bronze warheads. Any thoughts?
Dave

[IMAGE]http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n27/David_Waples/PT%20BOATS/PT-61crewJuly1943.jpg[/IMAGE]

[IMAGE]http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n27/David_Waples/PT%20BOATS/Photo_Scan_PT_149_Starboard_Turret_Torpedo_Cropped2_zps7f302e95.jpg[/IMAGE]




David Waples

Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Apr 25, 2013 - 5:24am
Total Posts: 1615 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm



Hard to tell Dave from the photo of PT-61. To me that appears to be the torpedo covers in place, but after blowing up the photo, it was tough to really see. I am not sure if they had bronze war heads or not.



Posted By: Frank Andruss | Posted on: Apr 25, 2013 - 7:04am
Total Posts: 3964 | Joined: Feb 9, 2007 - 11:41am



I think most, if not all, of the noses of the Mark VIII torpedoes I've seen in photos of the fish in their tubes in the forward (combat) areas -- "warshot warheads" as Jerry called them -- don't have towing rings or "nipples" on them -- I seem to remember they're smooth and feature-less.



Posted By: Drew Cook | Posted on: Apr 25, 2013 - 11:58am
Total Posts: 1262 | Joined: Oct 19, 2006 - 10:44am



This is a MK18 with the cover fitted. It's probably a Mod 1, as it is on a 77' boat.

[IMaGe]http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i204/alross2/cvr_zpsaacfa769.jpg[/IMaGe]

Al



Posted By: alross2 | Posted on: Apr 25, 2013 - 2:35pm
Total Posts: 906 | Joined: Oct 30, 2006 - 8:19pm



Drew, do you have some examples you can share? I can't find anything. I know I've seen one before but I'll be damned if I can find anything now.

Update..

So are we looking at a warhead? Or are we looking at a cover?

[IMAGE]http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n27/David_Waples/PT%20BOATS/Photo_Scan_PT_149_Starboard_Turret_Torpedo_Cropped2_zps7f302e95.jpg[/IMAGE]
Dave

David Waples

Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Apr 25, 2013 - 7:32pm
Total Posts: 1615 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm



I'd say warhead.

Will

Posted By: Will Day | Posted on: Apr 25, 2013 - 9:27pm
Total Posts: 1909 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 4:19pm



Has anyone else noticed that looks like half of a bikini top? You need a full frontal shot to get the total effect though.




Posted By: Jeff D | Posted on: Apr 25, 2013 - 10:27pm
Total Posts: 1897 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am



Hey Will, I call them warheads too, I was just trying to differentiate between practice warheads and the warheads with explosives inside them.. What is the correct terminology to use? Jerry

Jerry Gilmartin

Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Apr 25, 2013 - 11:43pm
Total Posts: 1230 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm



That triangular plate on the front sure looks like it is welded into place, which in my opinion looks more like the torpedo cover.



Posted By: Frank Andruss | Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 1:33am
Total Posts: 3964 | Joined: Feb 9, 2007 - 11:41am




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."

Posted By: PeterTareBuilder2 | Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 1:48am
Total Posts: 204 | Joined: Dec 8, 2012 - 6:03pm



I agree Peter, looks like a retainer to me. Here's a higher quality closeup from a photo scan:

[image]http://www.pt103.com/images/ptpics/PT_149_Starboard_Turret_Torpedo_Retainer.jpg[/image]




Posted By: Jeff D | Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 3:01am
Total Posts: 1897 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am



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?

[IMAGE]http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n27/David_Waples/PT%20BOATS/Untitled_zps484ff624.png[/IMAGE]

David Waples

Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 5:03am
Total Posts: 1615 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm



Hi Jerry Try Pratice Warheads and Live Warheads, thats the terms the Aussie Army use.

D.buck

Posted By: David Buck | Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 5:18am
Total Posts: 332 | Joined: May 4, 2008 - 2:59am



Hey Jer; I think the real hardcore PT men called it a "torpedo thingy". . .

Will

Posted By: Will Day | Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 9:31am
Total Posts: 1909 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 4:19pm



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.



Posted By: Drew Cook | Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 3:01pm
Total Posts: 1262 | Joined: Oct 19, 2006 - 10:44am



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


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.





Posted By: Bob Butler | Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 5:33pm
Total Posts: 192 | Joined: Mar 23, 2013 - 11:58am



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

Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 7:03pm
Total Posts: 1230 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm



The point I was trying to make is there were rings in live warheads, even though this was different.



Posted By: Bob Butler | Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 7:52pm
Total Posts: 192 | Joined: Mar 23, 2013 - 11:58am



Frank sent me this photo of some poor sailor in his tube greasing outfit greasing the inside of the tubes. I wonder how that works? Start at the front and work your way back?

Anyway, Frank believes that in my previously posted photo that we're looking at a warhead. I tend to agree based on the round circle under the retaining plate. But there is a doubt in my mind because attached to this tube is a tube cover. What is clear though is that you couldn't just flop the cover down and fire. It would clearly be in the way. I wonder if one of our vets remembers how this was done.


Dave

[IMAGE]http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n27/David_Waples/PT%20BOATS/Image8_zpsd7e1c0d4.jpg[/IMAGE]

David Waples

Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Apr 26, 2013 - 9:44pm
Total Posts: 1615 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm



Point taken about the ring on the nose of the submarine's warhead in that photo, Bob.

Submarine torpedoes had to be guided into and through deck hatches and onto their below-decks roller racks in the torpedo rooms, so I would think the nose rings would have facilitated that.

I also thought that the early-war U.S. submarines carried Mark VIIIs, the same as the PTs, and had the same amount of difficulty with them.

I would also think the triangular plate & wire "bras" would have easily and quickly been removed as the PTs were heading out on patrol.

Since Bridge Carney has access to the 157's torpedoman, Welford West, how about Mr. West weighing in on these issues?



Posted By: Drew Cook | Posted on: Apr 27, 2013 - 2:49pm
Total Posts: 1262 | Joined: Oct 19, 2006 - 10:44am



Notice the right of the poor sailor in the tube, is the tube cover on the deck, held in place with that looks like rope and the thumb screw.



Posted By: Frank Andruss | Posted on: Apr 27, 2013 - 3:33pm
Total Posts: 3964 | Joined: Feb 9, 2007 - 11:41am



Drew, you read my mind. Bridge please, you can settle this for us. Frank you got a keen eye. Thanks...



Posted By: Bob Butler | Posted on: Apr 27, 2013 - 4:18pm
Total Posts: 192 | Joined: Mar 23, 2013 - 11:58am



I just watched a bunch of video on PT Boats. If you guys don't have the DVD "Devil Boat: The Saga of PT 658" you should get it. Beyond the story of restoration is a great narrative and video of PT Boats in WWII. Not just Higgins but Elco. I watched a lot of shots of torpedo's being shot out of those tubes and what became obvious to me was that the torpedo sat farther back in the tube. That and the photo above that Frank provided which clearly shows the cover and the same cabling device used to hold the cover in place.

Some of the boats also opted for canvas covers for their tubes and if you look at them closely you can tell the torpedo sits back further into the tube.

So my vote now is for cover and not warhead.

Dave

David Waples

Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Apr 27, 2013 - 4:58pm
Total Posts: 1615 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm



Hi All just looking at the construction of the tube in the photo with the salior in the tube, it appears that a ring in with an L shape has been stich welded onto the tube thus forming a U section at the end of the tube.

This U section has been formed to locate the cap on the end of the tube while the various wires or bolts retain the cap in place.

In the photo that Jeff D posted with the small plate and the three wires attached to it the U section at the end of the tube can be clearly seen,It would seem then that we are looking at the warhead behind the small metal plate I guess!

D.buck

Posted By: David Buck | Posted on: Apr 28, 2013 - 2:48pm
Total Posts: 332 | Joined: May 4, 2008 - 2:59am



Man, I keep flip flopping on wether we're looking at a warhead or a tube cover. I've go to give this some thought. In the mean time if somebody has anything more concrete please let us know. Fortunately I'm in no hurry to button down the business end of the torpedo tube for a while yet.
Dave

David Waples

Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Apr 28, 2013 - 5:52pm
Total Posts: 1615 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm



OK David lets try this,

You can see in the photo with the sailor in the tube under his hand wich is hanging out of the tube that the tube comes to a nice square edge, now if there was a cap fitted to the end of the tube you would not see that square edge but rather a concave curve formed by the metal of the cap.

In other words the concave section of the cap would hide the square edge from view.

As well as the inner edge being hidden the outer edge would be visable as a small step at the edge of the cap as the cap locates into the slot between the tube and the welded on angle.

Therefore as we can see the square edge of the tube there is no cap covering it therefore that only leaves us with one conclusion and that is that we are looking at what lies behind the cap in this case it appears to be a Torpedo warhead!

Anyway thats my two cents worth, I did bounce the photos up and down to various zoom settings and it becomes easer to see as you do that

I also understand your timeing issue and am wondering if there maybe a cutaway drawing that may show the end of the tube, and if someone on the board might have one, that would show this area in detail.

D.buck

Posted By: David Buck | Posted on: Apr 29, 2013 - 4:38am
Total Posts: 332 | Joined: May 4, 2008 - 2:59am



The practice heads look like they were properly called exercise heads. From torpedoman Jack Duncan's class excercise:

[image]http://www.pt103.com/images/asst/ExerciseHeadMkXVIImod1_DwgJackDuncan_Small.jpg[/image]

Jack says that the torch case "housed a smoke flare to guide the torpedo retriever to recover the fish after it had finished its test run".




Posted By: Jeff D | Posted on: Apr 29, 2013 - 10:00am
Total Posts: 1897 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am



In PT Boats in action on page 15 there are two photos, one with a torpedo tube with a cap and the other a torpedo tube with a live warhead ( with a ring). These photos were taken on a 77' Elcol . The photo David posted showed some poor sole prepping a tube with a cap hanging from a cable. I'm convinced the Italeri Kit has two different style caps and no live warheads. And rings were common on some Mk VIII's.



Posted By: Bob Butler | Posted on: Apr 29, 2013 - 10:01am
Total Posts: 192 | Joined: Mar 23, 2013 - 11:58am



Here's some tube lengths from ordnance drawings Al Ross supplied, and torpedo lengths from the site Al posted:

Tube length from muzzle to end of door flange: 242 7/8".
Door goes in the tube 2 11/16".
Which leaves about 240" open length.

Torpedo lengths:
Mark XIV torpedo: 240"
Mark XIV torpedo with elongated warhead: 246"
Mark VIII-3D torpedo: 250.88"

I don't know how far back the torpedoes sat when secured.




Posted By: Jeff D | Posted on: Apr 29, 2013 - 12:33pm
Total Posts: 1897 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am



I asked Jack some questions, here's his response (after my questions):

Was the ring on the front only on exercise heads, for towing it back after use? Most photos of boats in action seem to lack the rings. Questions were asked if the ring was screwed into a war head for loading then replaced with a smooth cover.

Did any torpedoes stick out past the end of the tube? I see on this page that lengths varied: [url]http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ref/PT-Manual/MTBM-2.html#C6[/url]. An image from a History Channel show seems to show a torpedo sticking WAY out, but it may be already starting to launch:

[image]http://www.pt103.com/images/ptpics/devilBoatsSharkTorpedo.jpg[/image]

[green]Double answer: No idea about the shark face sticking out but the exploder impeller, the little water wheel thingie that arms the warhead, would have been exposed while trained outboard and allowed to turn without some sort of lock on it. Such lock would have to be fastened to the boat -- a lanyard or some such -- to strip away upon launch. Never can recall seeing any shark faces on fish. Maybe the memory banks got erased, though. Wouldn't the gaudy white paint show up easily in darkness???? Maybe Melville or Newport Torpedo Station?

Nose ring on exercise head; used to attach line to hoist or retrieve the torpedo at the end of its run to return to the shop for overhaul. A crane hauled it out of the water where it was floating vertically nose up. Torpedoes ran about $10,000 each if those memory banks are functioning. That was a fortune in those World War One days when they were built, so they had to be recovered and used over. My log says my newest Mk 8 was made in 1919! WW1 surplus???

A war head didn't need a nose ring for loading into the tube. That was done horizontally. Imagine the screws holding the war head to the air flask while vertical giving away with the resultant damage. A torpedo cart always carried, stored and loaded a Mk 8 horizontally. They were BIG!

My brain hurts! It ain't worked that hard in decades.

Remember, all, I had another 42 years of service memories to sort through to go back to 1943. In fact, I can't tell you where or when we took off the tubes and exchanged them for racks. Rendova, Tulagi?? Memory wiped out! The Base Force Bastards did that kind of grunt work, anyway, while we crewmembers helped somewhat by supervising. Otherwise known as watching after offering to help. Also, I was a somewhat traumatically overwhelmed 18-year-old at the time of that occurrence and we only have one torpedoman aboard. Strikers were assigned later on as we added guns.

Pretty sure we got the self-sealing gas tanks to replace the aluminum ones at Treasury. I would not place more than a lunch bet on that, however! Or that might have been where the base force put the armor plate on the sides to protect the tanks. Don't remember how the armor was attached, either. Motor Mac stuff. No' my yob, man!

Jack[/green]

I think that on the Mark 8 torpedoes, the ring was only on the excercise head.

The torpedo shown above with the shark face was probably a Mark 14.

I noticed that Devil Boats shows what looks like the triangle retainer loosened:

[image]http://www.pt103.com/images/ptpics/devilBoatsTorpedoRetainer01.jpg[/image]
[image]http://www.pt103.com/images/ptpics/devilBoatsTorpedoRetainer02.jpg[/image]




Posted By: Jeff D | Posted on: Apr 29, 2013 - 1:41pm
Total Posts: 1897 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am



I'd have to disagree with Bob on the "no live warheads" as far as the Italeri PT 109 kit parts.

The torpedo nose parts with the molded-in triangular "bra" plates and cables are meant to represent live warheads -- just like in the photo of the 149's torpedoman cranking the tube out into firing position.

Those aren't "caps" or "covers" -- in the 149 photo or the Italeri parts.





Posted By: Drew Cook | Posted on: Apr 29, 2013 - 1:55pm
Total Posts: 1262 | Joined: Oct 19, 2006 - 10:44am



Jeff, you nailed it. That's the image I referred to earlier. One has holes. One does not, or appears not to have them. It has a bonze like tone to it at least in these photos. Jerry Beasley is going to reach out to the Navy Torpedo Museum and find out what it is that we're dealing with in this photo. One step closer to solving the mystery.

If the ring would be used in the loading process I think it would be used for unloading... I think. One of the drawings we have for the torpedo tubes is of the winch system that is purpose built to attached to the breach of the torpedo tube. Drawings below. We see in the photo of the torpedo being loaded onto a series of rollers on the deck of a 77' Elco. I can imagine that once the torpedo is rested on those rollers it can be winched into the tube, or gravity may assist because of the downward slope of the deck. Not sure how you would do the rear tubes though. Maybe somebody has some info about that?

[IMAGE]http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n27/David_Waples/PT%20BOATS/Torpedowinch_zps1de3379c.jpg[/IMAGE]

[IMAGE]http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n27/David_Waples/PT%20BOATS/Untitled_zps9827d00f.jpg[/IMAGE]

[IMAGE]http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n27/David_Waples/PT%20BOATS/MarkVIIITorpedo.jpg[/IMAGE]

David Waples

Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Apr 29, 2013 - 8:24pm
Total Posts: 1615 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm



If I might offer my speculation about this.

I think the bronze circular area shown on the warhead indicates that the rings are removable and that these particular warheads had been painted with the rings in place and then, at some point, the rings were removed.

I suspect the rings interfere with the small triangular retainer and possibly with the larger, full-sized cover so the rings were removed.

It would seem that the rings were not needed to load the torpedos into the tubes but, I suggest, they were re-attached when it came time to remove a torpedo from a tube.

I think the kit's piece with the triangular cover models a retainer on a live warhead and the other piece is a full size cover.

Just my $0.02-worth.



Posted By: ducati650 | Posted on: Apr 30, 2013 - 5:55am
Total Posts: 450 | Joined: Feb 19, 2007 - 10:01am



Hi everyone.

Pages 11 and 12 of the U.S. Navy February 1943 Motor Torpedo Boat Manual
describes 1/4-inch steel-wire bridles used to secure over the torpedo war head on Mark 18-1 tubes. The rest of that section is very interesting too.

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ref/PT-Manual/MTBM-1.html

Torpedo tubes.--Due to the necessity for keeping torpedoes ready for firing at a moment's notice, tube covers are no longer kept on the tubes. Therefore, in order to insure against stop pins shearing and a torpedo unexpectedly slipping out, all Mark 18-1 tubes should be equipped with 1/4-inch steel-wire bridles to secure over the war head. This bridle has a tripping latch which can be tripped in a second once action is expected.

To replace the watertight features of a tube cover, a heavy axle grease packed liberally in the seam between the tube and the warhead will prove very satisfactory.

Tubes should be dove once a month and slushed. Kerosene or paint thinner can be used to clean tubes. A good slush is a mixture of heavy grease and hot-running torpedo oil. Care must be taken to prevent grit, etc., from getting into the tube as a small amount of grit will cause a long deep scratch oh the air flask.

Torpedoes.--Since torpedoes are the most important piece of equipment on a boat, no effort should be spared in caring for them.

New squadrons getting torpedoes should inspect them immediately for defects. One defect was discovered in the starting lever of a torpedo which was too long. The torpedo was loaded in the tube without difficulty but a small amount of friction tripped the lever and started a hot run.

War heads.--War heads hit by .50 caliber bullets are not apt to explode on impact; however, they will probably start burning and explode shortly; therefore, war heads ignited in this way should be disposed of by firing the torpedo or otherwise jettisoning it.

I think the bridle (torpedo retention bracket?) is depicted in Italeri's PT 109 kit as the alternative to the domed tube cover. I'm sure I've seen an illustration or photo of this bridle with the triangular plate next to a tube cover somewhere in my reference books or on the internet, but for the life of me, I can't find it now.

I hope you find this information useful. I intend to use the Italeri bridle over the warheads on my kit.
Pete





Posted By: Rock1947a | Posted on: Apr 30, 2013 - 11:00am
Total Posts: 24 | Joined: Mar 1, 2007 - 10:56am



Great catch Pete, thank you! It also answers a question I had about how water was kept out without a cover.




Posted By: Jeff D | Posted on: Apr 30, 2013 - 12:10pm
Total Posts: 1897 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am



[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/PT-157RendovaJuly-9-43.jpg[/image]

Found this shot of PT-157's bridle fitted to Starboard Torpedo Tube. Same picture is featured on the cover of Bridge Carney's "First Up"

Hope this helps.

Wayne



Posted By: Wayne Traxel | Posted on: Apr 30, 2013 - 12:17pm
Total Posts: 247 | Joined: Oct 11, 2006 - 5:40am



Thank god we got an answer!!!



Posted By: Bob Butler | Posted on: Apr 30, 2013 - 12:25pm
Total Posts: 192 | Joined: Mar 23, 2013 - 11:58am



OK -- so they're "bridles," not "bras!"[:-happy-:]



Posted By: Drew Cook | Posted on: Apr 30, 2013 - 2:47pm
Total Posts: 1262 | Joined: Oct 19, 2006 - 10:44am



Hi again.

I forgot to mention that another indication that Italeri Part # 32E represents a torpedo with attached bridle and tube attachments, and not a different type of cover, is that the part fits inside the front of the tube with a small amount of clearance between it and the tube.

I still haven't found the illustration I once saw about how the bridle functioned. From what I recall, the upper cable attachement point had a quick-release mechanism that simply dropped the cable and triangular plate downwards. I'm not sure if the two lower attachment points were also released, but I don't think so. Does anyone else have further information?

Pete



Posted By: Rock1947a | Posted on: Apr 30, 2013 - 5:41pm
Total Posts: 24 | Joined: Mar 1, 2007 - 10:56am



Pete, that was a great find! Thanks for pointing that out. It clears up a lot of questions in my mind.

It may have been called a bridle but it will be forever etched into my mind as Jeff's bikini bottom fantasy retaining plate.

Dave

David Waples

Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Apr 30, 2013 - 8:48pm
Total Posts: 1615 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm



David,
"it will be forever etched into my mind as Jeff's bikini bottom fantasy retaining plate."
Hah! That is too funny! This, ladies and gents, is why this Forum is such a fun place to hang out!

PS I will make sure all my girlfriends in the future will have at least one bikini equipped in this manner....

Jerry



Jerry Gilmartin

Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Apr 30, 2013 - 11:08pm
Total Posts: 1230 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm



Pete go to page 5 of this thread in the colour shots the bridles top has been released and is still attached via the lower two holes.

D.buck

Posted By: David Buck | Posted on: May 1, 2013 - 12:27am
Total Posts: 332 | Joined: May 4, 2008 - 2:59am




David,
"it will be forever etched into my mind as Jeff's bikini bottom fantasy retaining plate."
Hah! That is too funny! This, ladies and gents, is why this Forum is such a fun place to hang out!

PS I will make sure all my girlfriends in the future will have at least one bikini equipped in this manner....

Jerry


Jerry, I'm assuming you're referring to the "quick release" feature. :-)

Dave

David Waples

Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: May 1, 2013 - 4:51am
Total Posts: 1615 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm



Ok, my turn.
Back on the first page, you guys do remember me telling you, way back when, those are MK XV torpedoes in the tubes of PT 61, don't you? That is why they stick out further from the end of the tubes. These MK XV's were "Bummed" by Joe Kernall and Ken Prescott from a Destroyer that was passing through. This is an easy way to identify her in later Tulagi and Russell Island photos, she was the only boat that used them.
Take care,
TED

MKXV demensions:
Weight 2,840 lb (1288 kg)
Length 24 ft (7.32 m)
Diameter 21 in (533 mm)

MKVIII MOD 8 Demensions:
Weight 3,176 lbs. (1,441 kg)*
Length 21 ft (6.510 m)
Diameter 21 in (533 mm)


*Earlier MK VIII Mods 3A and 3B: Weight: 3,050 lbs. (1,383 kg)
Mods 3C and 3D: Weight: 3,150 lbs. (1,429 kg)

P.S. As for other items mentioned in this post....Yes, the 3 cable and trianglular plate retainer was used while underway, during transit periods or non patrol periods This was to keep torpedo properly seated in the tube, as the various sea states could shift the torpedo inside the tube, and create a misfire, when used. This was removed when readying to fire, then tube was cranked out into firing position. Once this was completed Torpedoman would notify Exec or Skipper "Torpedoes 1 and 2 ready to fire" or somthing to that effect.
Also, wasn't the 3 cable and trianglular plate retainer also used for loading the torpedoes, via a Come Along Cable Puller ?








Posted By: TED WALTHER | Posted on: May 1, 2013 - 8:10am
Total Posts: 2898 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am