The Battle of Taranto: When Biplanes Crippled a Fleet
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 сер 2024
- Join us in #WarThunder for free using this link and get a premium tank or aircraft and three days of premium time as a bonus: v2.xyz/WarThund...
If you enjoyed this video and want to see more made, consider supporting my efforts on Patreon: / historigraph
Check out my other WW2 Vids here: • The Second World War
#BattleOfTaranto #Historigraph
► Twitter: / historigraph
►Facebook: / historigraph
►Instagram: / historigraph
►Patreon: / historigraph
►Discord:
►My Gaming Channel: / addaway
►My Twitch: / addaway
![Дон ДОН, Алаудинов и СБЕЖАВШИЕ из под Курска ахматовцы 😁 [Пародия]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dEfCf5IK26Q/mqdefault.jpg)
Join us in #WarThunder for free using this link and get a premium tank or aircraft and three days of premium time as a bonus: v2.xyz/WarThunderWithHistorigraph
If you enjoyed this video and want to see more made, consider supporting my efforts on Patreon: www.patreon.com/historigraph
Check out my other WW2 Vids here: ua-cam.com/play/PLk2daSTx1RZv3JUm35TfOigCrkV6eMEBf.html
I get that you get sponsored and that's a good thing. But, in all due respect, than combo deal is pretty much standard for every new WT account, not just the ones from affiliate partnerships. So.. no big gains for new players. This is not your fault, it's just me complaining that Gaijin should be more rewarding for new players when using affiliates to promote their game.
That's all the negativity. In general, I'm a long time sub and will continue to, I love your channel and effort.
Love the videos, but Fuck Warthunder.
Dogshit little game makes a mockery of real history by trying to re-write armor values and inflating penetration physics.
Historigraph is there a possible way to give you a Hefty one-time donation instead of a patrion pledge
Could you do a video on mers el kebir, my granddad was involved, he hit B turret of the dunquerque and also hit the Strasbourg.
What happened to your Blitzkrieg 1940 video? I cannot view it for some reason
"Prime Minister, we intercepted this transmission between Rome and Berlin last night. Bletchley Park just decoded it. Message reads "Swordfish OP, pls nerf.""
Italian Navy: Man, we really need to come up with a high tech answer to the British naval superiority here.
British Fleet Air Arm: Haha Swordfish go brrr
WTF does nerf mean please?
@@3vimages471 to “nerf” something is to make said thing less powerful / less able.
Say you have a gun in a game that is too powerful, well the developers might “nerf” the gun and make it less powerful.
@@foresthamilton2243 Thank`s Fawn
@@foresthamilton2243 Thanks. A little more than a decade ago, I used to claim that I was the oldest video game addict in America. I haven't got, and didn't have, a clue if this was remotely true, but my younger coworkers were amazed that someone my age even played... Still, I'd never heard the "nerf" term. Now, I don't even play, at all. Old, disabled, and retired... (I know --- excuses 😒) But this bit of history gives me hope --- that if necessary, with the 7-Ps and some good ordinance, even an old obsolete piece of equipment like me.., might be effective against an enemy 🤔 LOL! Imagination is a wonderful thing, ain't it !?!?
The swordfish is like your oldest friend. You wonder why you still keep him around, but then he comes in clutch at all the right moments
Also known as a experienced wingman
Swordfish crippled the Bismarck too.
Very similar to the Sea Harrier - everybody said it was outdated and should have been retired, but it still kicked ass and took care of business in the Falklands.
What? When have you ever wondered if you should still keep your old friend??
@@GdaySport The Sea Harrier was brand new in the Falklands War.
Amazingly, the Swordfish ended the war as a radar equipped, rocket firing, antisubmarine and antishipping bomber. This one ancient and obsolescent outlived two other more modern types meant to replace it. No other British carrier plane sunk more Axis shipping than the Swordfish.
Jerry: Look their a swordfish
Hans: I don't want to
Jerry: What are your doing with that lifeboat
Yes! Actually sank more enemy shipping than any other ALLIED aircraft. I give chapter and verse under the post about "Worst British Aircraft", well it was in business for the whole six years in a target rich environment. Also acted as gunnery spotter, Warspite in the Norway campaign for example.
The longevity of the Swordfish had many reasons. One was inadequate torpedo bombers that were designed to replace it (some of the prototypes or others were terrible), surprising durability the aircraft had when facing flak, good takeoff speed from carriers, ease of maintenance and the only available aircraft of the type before Lend-Lease.
@@BHuang92 The Swordfish survived for many of the same reasons the Grumman Wildcat/Martlet and Douglas Dauntless were in use after more modern and presumably more effective aircraft were available. They were planes that filled a role on small carriers or in specific circumstances that made them the best plane of the task. I don't think anyone could make a successful argument that the Swordfish was a better plane than the Avenger or the Wildcat/Martlet was better than the Hellcat or Corsair, but they were better planes in those limited circumstances that made them the best for the job at hand.
@@BHuang92 And it's worth mentioning that its incredible degree of lift enabled it to get off from the decks of MAC carriers (relatively slow converted merchantmen with small flight decks), with said radar set, plus a choice of bombs, rockets, or depth charges, and a full load of fuel. The faster monoplanes couldn't do that. I keep quoting the FAA pilot who witnessed a Swordfish take off (albeit from a full size carrier) with a load consisting of a quarter ton starter trolley, two bicycles, a full crew and the crew's suitcases strapped to the lower wing, plus clothing wrapped around the tailplane when the suitcases burst open under lift. It was not nicknamed the "Stringbag" for nothing.
Swordfish to good. whats next, they fly so slow that German AA fire cant compute the correct lead?
Nah that's impossible :)
Thats what happened to the 15 Swordfish that attacked the Bismark on 26th may 1941, though there are other reasons that none of them were knocked down. Their speed and maneuverability kept them safe until they crippled the ship.
And then attack 2 german battleships in the channel and get wrecked
Wooden planes, the guided missiles can't lock on to those!
@@JamesBu11 that was the joke... why did you explain a joke? That ruins it ya know!
Whole world: *accepts biplanes are outdated*
Royal Navy: Hold my beer
Royal Navy was more like: "Doesn't matter when the other side has no planes"
@@deidryt9944 lowkey
Whole world: Who knew wood and paper would be so deadly nah they where just lucky that the Italian are so useless
@@USSAnimeNCC- Explain the Bismarck then. Also, the Mosquito while you're at it.
@@BumMcFluff I was joking man also the whole world probably thought the same at both time until sinking of Bismark at least
The Swordfish
The plane that forgot it was obsolete.
Just like the m1911
"Old. Not obsolete." - T-800
Heart of Iron The Italians at Taranto and the Bismarks crew would not argue that point!
"I'm sorry, must've missed the phone call because of tea time! Hope it wasn't too bothersome to not know I'm obsolete?"
Bismark, Taranto: "Bloody british biplane..."
It was literally so obsolete, it had come full circle to be effective again.
The Swordfish is extremely underrated. It's "flaws" are what made it so good. Some Swordfish that attacked the Bismarck had suffered over 300 hits, yet they were still in perfect flying condition.
There's a story somewhere of a Swordfish getting hit, and the pilot making a landing on his carrier to find that one of the actual cylinders had been knocked out by flak, yet the engine still functioned and got him back safely.
300?
I remember Bismarck's video on the topic why AA didn't manage to shoot but i don't remember 300 hits?
@@EagleSix52 Well, thats an estimation actually😂😂. But Military History Visualized made a Video on the topic why the Bismarck didn't manage to shoot down any Swordfish, I highly recommend it.
The pilots called them "string bags." They were covered in doped fabric, as all light planes of that era. I forgot which one, but one of the early US heavy bombers still used fabric covered control surfaces.
A shell or shrapnel will just go through and leave a hole, that is easily patched.
The swordfish may have had a ridiculous run, but whenever faced by modern planes they were made short work of, look no further than the finale of operation cerberus.
Biplanes OP pls nerf.
Admin: Italy your just useless
@@USSAnimeNCC- you're, greetings from Italy
Moderator: expected down time while we for once do what the people want and nerf bi plane
ALL ITALIAN WARTHUNDER PLAYERS SCREAMING ABOUT UK BIAS!
Britain: L2P noob
The swordfish reminds me of the Dark Knight in Monty Python.
"You're obselete"
"No I'm not"
"You've been hit dozens of times"
"Just a flesh wound"
What? The only line in that from Python is the flesh wound. The rest I don't know what looks like you just made it up
@@slinkerdeer I was adapting it to draw a parallel
@@Peoples_Republic_of_Devonshire The word is "paraphrase".
@@HemlockRidge thank you I was having a moment and couldn't think of the word
@@Peoples_Republic_of_Devonshire Gawd, don't ya just HATE brain farts?
Italy: Spends large portion of economy building a fleet to rival the British Mediterranean Fleet.
Britain: Straps torpedos to outdated biplanes.
“Laughs in English”
It was a big fault. Italy had not bad aircraft builders and for the enormous cost of that fleet could have built thousands of fighters, bombers and transport planes, because the MAIN need of Italy was to securing navigation from South Italy to Libya to give enough support to the African troops to win the battle with British forces in Egypt and take the Suez Canal, Palestine, and also French Lebanon and Syria.
Malta could have been destroyed and even Bizerte French Navy base in Tunisia.
So in 1940 Italy could have got French Northern Africa , far more rich than Libya, to occupy.
And with airforce bases in Morocco, Gibraltar could have been completely destroyed and made unavailable as British Base.
So no more British Fleet in Mediterranean sea with no harbour for support, with dangerous planes everywhere and nothing to do there!
But Mussolini was a stupid guy running Italy as it was a 19th century country!
And by the way French governments too. French scientist invented SONAR in 1927 and RADAR but french army waited after 1936 to begin to think that these major inventions could help against Germany. But the money was waisted in building the Maginot Line instead of planes and tanks!!!!
Old politicians, old generals, older people, old army.....and a very strong French Navy (but not enough submarines, less than Italy even if we had the biggest submarine cruiser named Surcouf, and no aircraft carriers).... that made nothing out of a naval defeat (even if allied with the Royal Navy) in Norway at the beginning of the War, being destroyed by Royal Navy in Mers-El-Kebir just after the "armistice" and finally most part sunk in Toulon in November 1942 when Germany invaded Southern French "Free Zone"
@@jmt97400 except Italy lacked the sheer resources to build thousands of ships. Also Italy lacked the strong industrial base that the other powers had. Aswell the Italians lacked competent commanders and equipment. Also the maginot line did it's job forcing the germans to go around again. France did lack the unity and had outdated ideas as to how war would be done
@@bluemobster0023 Italy HAD enough ships in 1940 so she found the ressources. Till 1935 (beginning of the conquest of Ethiopia) Italy was free to buy coal to England (after from fascist Spain and Germany) ) and iron from french algeria . But Italy didn't have oil for his ships! Northern italy had an industrial basis, not enough for 50 millions people but enough for its army, with a big hydroelectric production and specialized productions in the Alps and in Terni (Apennine Mounts) : Fiat produced since the 30ies machines for heavy industry that Germany bought (the name of the society is now COMAU) . Problems of Italy weren't material, they were about managemment and totally the fault of the stupid fascist regime.Italian had very good soldiers during the WWI when she fought and resisted against a more powerfull austrian empire army which controlled more industrial regions (Silesia, Bohemia) and had a strong german industrial support.
And the Maginot line didn't do nothing because as the belgian fortresses , the Maginot line was built as a sum of fortresses united by tunnels , made to fight against tanks or walking soldiers while trying to go thru the walls and ditches, but not against paratroops able to come from reverse side!And it was simple to wait several days even weeks till the french soldiers must go out and surrender or die by lack of food! You know what you need to feed 1200 guys? Most of 90% of every fortress since the beginning of history fell because of lack of food!
@@jmt97400 dude the germans never broke the maginot line every time they pushed into France they went around it through the easier Belgium fortresses and then made the French retreat. Germany could never break the line. As for Italy they still could not out produce the allies in the war despite a somewhat strong industrial base. As for Italy's performance against the Austrians it mute as even the germans called the Austrian Hungarians a dead weight on the German army. It's like saying a weak man managed to hold back a dying blind and sick old man.
@@bluemobster0023 German army never tried to go thru Maginot line. In Every war with France they ALWAYS come thru Belgium or Netherlands, for two major reasons:
1- The land is more easy and neither Belgium nor Netherlands cannot stop any army wanting to go thru them!
2- During a war where England will be allied with France and send soldiers and guns on the continental Europe since napoleonic wars, the FIRST thing to do to secure german armies is to control Netherlands and Belgium in order ENgland cannot use their harbours to make their army go thru the Channel. France knows perfectly that fact, first of all Colonel de Gaulle but the very aged french headquarter didn't learn what planes and tanks were able to do, as they were all educated in infantry and horse cavalry . The 3 billions that France spent into the Maginot Line from 1928 to 1940 could have paid more plane and tanks that Germany got in 1940, and most of all changed the mind of the french army (do you know that in September 1939 they entered 15km in Saarland, find no german soldiers and turn back to France????) and give to the most modern industries an enormous kick..... that arrived in reality but only after..1939, too late!
So even without any Maginot Line and not a single french soldier between Luxembourg to Basel, not a single german soldier will have tried to take the direct way to France (even in 1870 they were blocked in Belfort and win in Metz only with Bazaine betrayal and the mean battle was once again in Sedan!) IF NOT HAVING destroyed first all the Netherlands and Belgium armies and secondly french and england forces. They tried in 1914 with a far better strategic position as controlling all Alsace-Moselle land, and they failed because they were not strong enough, they learn the lesson and in 1940 the tried and they succeeded because they were stronger and most of all with a very efficient air force!
Don't forget that german armies are very good to beat very weaker forces but they often failed against peoples which wanted to resist them: see the battle of Leningrad, the operations in Yugoslavia and in Greece where nothing has gone as they have previsted :-) . They have always considered their allied countries as slaves, including Austro-hungarian empire they fight against to begin the building of the German Empire from 1860 to 1870. So the german judgements on other fighting countries are to be taken for what they are :-)
Every time someone describes the Swordfish as obsolete they then go on to describe an action in which they were obviously not obsolete.
They said the same about the SBD-3...
Taking note of this in case WWIII wiped out most modern air forces in days and the supply chain required to produce modern combat aircrafts go down the drain so replacements cannot be produced quickly enough while air superiority remains a must.
Whilst the swordfish was by conventional thinking an obsolete aircraft, it was designed with Royal Navy commitments in mind. Whilst Japan and the US could afford to build aircraft like the zero and wildcats with no issue about access to reliable industries for spares, mtce and replacements the only truly solid source for these for the fleet air arm was Britain itself and spares would have long journeys to places like the China and Med stations. This led to the design being what it was.
Also not helping this was that the navy had no control over its air arms procurement for large parts of the interwar years as it all went through the air ministry and it cared more for the RAF than the air arm
Noticed this a few times. Also, I'm sure I read/seen somewhere that the Swordfish outlasted planes meant to replace it.
Rest of world;"Go away Swordfish, you're obsolete."
Swordfish; "Shan't! "
Next you’ll tell me that outdated Biplanes will sink the pride of the German Fleet.
Connor Bean 🤣🤣
I mean, they kinda did...
@@peknive8331 That's the joke.
They damaged her rudder (yes Bismarck is a she in my book) but the grunt work was carried out by surface warships.
@@daviddou1408 It was the Royal Navy that crippled Bismarck and the Royal Navy that completely eliminated it as a fighting force. End of story.
I am absolutely thrilled to have seen this. From 1963 -85 (I was an RN officer then} Major Oliver Patch was my next door neighbour in SW Wiltshire. You can see him in the vlog with Royal Marine Captains pips. He was a lovely man, and in retirement he did building work, and built an extension on my first house. He bore the good-natured ribbing of us "fisheads" when we asked how he managed to fly an aircraft wearing Royal Marine boots. To comment on an earlier comment, on the attack on the Bismark, firstly the German gunners couldn't depress their guns enough, the staff requirement of the Wehrmacht for AA guns was to counter dive bombers like the Stuka. Secondly, the gunsights couldn't cope with aircraft flying at about 75mph. Major Oliver Patch, DSO, Royal Marines, RIP.
Very interesting Clive, thank you. RIP Major Hatch. (How was the extension by the way? Not made of wood and string i hope.)
@@nickthorp5790 Yes! Clinker built but I don't think there was any string!
Which vlog is this?
It should also be noted that the Germans used different Flak systems fore and aft, meaning that either could hit, but not both.
Thank you for your service
*Japanese naval observers have entered the chat*
Yamato Joins the chat
USA leaves the chat
*map changed pearl harbour"
*Start planning and training for Pearl Harbor*
START ATTACKING PEARL HARBOR
"This plane is obsolete."
"It can carry torpedoes."
"But it's a damned biplane! We shouldn't have such outdated tech in this war!"
"It can carry torpedoes."
"...Fair enough."
How I imagine the conversation went in the british fleet air arm over Swordfish.
Nah, it was more like this:
- Do we have cash to replace these?
- No :(
- Ok, we'll make do with these for a bit longer... Hey, with a speed so low and good maneuverability, they are a bit safer to fly at night than the newer types, aren't they?
- Hmmm... Yesss... (sips tea)
@@VersusARCH Are you sure? The British during WW2 were notorious for aircraft production; it seems like they could've easily replaced the ageing swordfish with a new design if (and this wasn't unlikely during the war) they could put effort into researching and building a better aircraft.
It's so good,it outlived the plane that was suppose to replace it XD
It’s outdated
*slaps swordfish*
“It’ll get to Italy and get us so much spaghetti “
@@Puffin_777 i see this is a very old comment however i really really want to explain this xD The british aircraft procurement didnt go through the Navy or the FAA at the time, it went thorough the air ministry or something like that and they prefered spending on the RAF hence why we never got a true replacement aircraft for carriers till after the war
There was a Swordfish restored in Toronto, and I was fortunate to get alone in a hanger with this aged dowager (the day before she was about to be shipped out to a museum). I climbed into the cockpit and sat there for a half-hour, imagining how it must have felt for those brave aircrews flying into the teeth of their enemy. I felt completely exposed, all that was between me and the sea was canvas and tubing. We owe a lot to this grand old lady, and infinite respect for those brave men who definitely changed history.
The Bismarck attack occurred in May but it was still the North Atlantic. Can you imagine how cold it must have been in those open cockpits? Nobody talks about that.
Imagine what havoc the Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm might have wreaked on the Italian fleet at Taranto had two aircraft carriers participated in the attack as had originally been planned!
There would have been nothing left.
@Robert Storey - that is my thought as well!
Vlad Melis that would imply the Italians had some level of competence which is just impossible.
@Vlad Melis - the Italians DID spot the Royal Navy, when the Swordfish biplanes attacked the Regia Marina base at Taranto.
Vlad Melis Sorry couldn’t hear that over failing to invade Greece.
Those brits are a scrappy bunch. Bad odds don’t seem to phase them much.
when youre a comparatively tiny island nation who somehow conquered, colonised or managed to control a quarter of the worlds landmass, and also have simultaneously have undisputed control over the oceans; long odds are kinda the norm 😂
A strong culture amongst the nobility that in return for their (largely ill gotten) land and wealth their sons should be prepared to sacrifice, from medieval knights to (especially) the naval and air officer class, without questioning the cause at issue: my country is at war, so I go
Not saying I approve, just saying that is a key difference
Most officers and soldiers have a morale based primarily on a belief in the cause, and/or defence of the homeland
The Japanese too had a more extreme version of this, but with less technology, and oil :)
Being so hyper-aggressive was very much a Royal Navy "thing". That's due to one guy - Admiral John Byng. As part of the Seven Years' War in 1756 he was ordered to relieve a besieged British garrison on Minorca with a decrepit fleet that was practically falling apart on route. He scuffled a bit with the French besiegers before realising it was a waste of time so headed back to Gibraltar to fix his ships up. The admiralty weren't happy at Byng's tepid efforts...so unhappy in fact that they had him shot by firing squad.
It was a crazy overreaction, but it got the point across to the fleet - go to any lengths to achieve victory, or end up like Byng. At first this behaviour was likely enforced through fear alone, but after a generation or so, it was baked into Royal Navy doctrine. You saw the enemy - you attacked. Odds be damned.
That psychology worked not just on the RN, but on their opponents as well. Half the fear factor of the Royal Navy at its height was based on their image of barely leashed psychopaths desperate to blast any ship in their cross hairs.
It helps to convince the enemy they can't win before a fight even begins, and there were some ridiculous stories as a result, like massive ships of the line fleeing from single RN frigates. Of course much of that changed in the era of the battleship, when naval professionalism became far more important than bravado, and ships became far too precious and expensive to throw into conflict on a whim.
Faze, not phase
Royal Navy: and that is how you cook pasta
Japanese Navy: write that down, write that down
I have read "To War In a Stringbag" at least three times and this part of the book is one of the highlights of Cmdr. Charles Lamb's career. This is the first time I have seen the battle actually documented like this. What remarkable men who flew the antiquated but deadly Swordfish.
@Great Idea Thanks for the suggestion. I have read "To War in a Stringbag" several times too, but decades ago. My copy fell apart & I never replaced it. It's time.
Italian Navy: Defend convoys. Avoid major engagements.
German Navy: Attack convoys. "Avoid" major engagements.
Japanese Navy: *A T T A C*
Royal navy. Be everywhere at once and thwart all of them
Royal Navy: throw some Swordfishes at it.
US Navy /: B U I L D
The Royal Navy sinks the Italian Navy's Battleships in Harbour the Japanese Navy sinks the American Navy's Battleships in Harbour Japanese Navy trained by the Royal Navy is there a pattern developing here lol.
@@allansmith3837 no because the US sunk everything Japanese in the end and the British navy was useless in the pacific as all it did was take losses
I swear to god the Italians were like bots during this war
@iuvenis animo Shooting into the sky was pretty standard AA operation for the period. Blanketing the sky in fire terrorises pilots, so they either fly very low (potentially crashing in their attempt), get flustered and drop early/late (probably missing), or make a mad dash straight into the firestorm and get chewed apart by AA.
The real fault was with the lack of torpedo netting, if those had been in place few of those torpedoes would have found their target. and instead hit the nets.
Well, when your tanks are so badly armored that they can be penetrated by almost any ammunition, your rifles are based on a fifty year old design, and your officers picked because of their political loyalty, then there will be problems. Didn't help that the Italian economy was completely unprepared for war and that Mussolini focused on the air force and army first, with the navy coming third.
Fireheart 1945 at the end of the day facist Italy was broken, the very ideology of fascism is unity through nationalism and military strength... A long story short Italy had neither of these. Think they lost to British forces a third their size, their entire fleet was paralysed by two squadrons of obsolete WW1 era bi-planes, and when the mainland Italy was invaded the country broke ranks betrayed its regime and joined the allies. So an interesting argument is raised as to whether WW2 era Italy can, by definition, even be called a true Facist country.
@@Fireheart1945 everything you said was right except the last parts. The Italian navy was the focus, not the air or army.
Italy was supposed to be prepared in 1946, and the Navy should have 8 battleships and 2carriers by that time, but Mussolini was retarded
Put it this way: to this day Taranto night is celebrated anually in the Fleet Air Arm, it's the most important night of our year!
I believe the Argentines also celebrate the dates they sunk British Ships in 1982. Salute.
So the one night of the year the Navy Chair Force actually has fun?
Do Royal Navy Submarine crews celebrate the sinking of General Belgrano in reply, then?
To all those commenting that the Italian navy was useless in WW2, please research the exploits of the Decima Flottiglia MAS. They executed many raids during '41- '43 using torpedo chariots or motor boats and sank a large number of ships, including battleships, cruisers, destroyers and tankers. The most famous raid was the December '41 raid on Alexandria where they sank the battleships HMS Valiant and HMS Queen Elizabeth as well as a tanker. There were many other attacks, some highly successful, but others ending in heavy losses.
There was no shortage of courage.
@ Octowuss They didnt sink the battleships Valiant and Queen Elizabeth,..they were damaged but both battleships were repaired and returned to service.
“There was a shortage of supplies
But there was not a shortage of courage”
That turned into a good quote
@@ggarlick46 they sank, after months of work they were refloated and repaired but they sank
@@fabioferrarese5600 Just type in Valiant and Queen Elizabeth battleships WW2 from the internet mate and it will give you the complete info... that they were both repaired and returned to active service and took part in further WW2 operations. Both ships survived the war and they were both scrapped after the war...simples.
@@ggarlick46they where sunk and out of service for 9 months, that's some valuable time
Swordfish
Outdated: yes
Incompetent: NO
Fantastic video. Such bravery from these men.
Swordfish most underrated British aircraft, won us two of the most important naval victories in WWII....
They would be a lot more effective today against enemy bases.
@@louiswright8282 anything would be more effective today since the RN only has a handful of helicopters nowadays.
They should make a movie about this air attack and the Hero's who flew those old planes, What guts.
Not everyone fighting in a war is a hero.....
Let me say something in order to respond some comments making fun of the Italian Navy. Disclaimer I'm italian so you may think I'm more informed or more biased, your choice.
The video is well done there is only point not mentioned: the day before the raid a storm wrecked 60 of the balloons protecting the harbour, leaving only 27 in place.
The raid was a success, but the ships were refloated and repaired in few months; the Cavour too was refloated and sent to the yard, but priority was given to other works and so the repairs were never completed. Mind that Cavour sister's ship, Cesare, made her last war mission january 1942, then was retired from the front line because of her obsolescence.
The italian raid in Alexandria harbour was an aptly answer, putting out of service for 5 monts 2 british battleships.
Contrary to what is stated in some comments, the raid gave not the the Mediterranean's control to the british: if the british had controlled the Mediterranean they would have been able to sail their convoys and to block the italian ones: only with the defeat of Italy the british were able to reopen the Suez route, and until the last day the italian ships supplied the army in north africa.
Regarding the comparison between the two fleets, the italian navy was designed and built to fight against the French navy: the treaties during the interwar period stated these ratios: USA and GB 5, Japan 3, France and Italy 1,75. Those ratios dictated the strategy of the italian navy, for a fleet in being, just like the German navy during WW1, the british were way more able than the italians to suffer ship's losses.
One last thing: it was because of the italian navy that the british suffered such grievous losses in the Pacific, the Repulse and Prince of Wales and others: the necessity to have a strong fleet in the Mediterranean meant few ships left to dispatch to the Far East.
When it came to the terms for the peace treaty after the war, the british wanted a punitive peace, differing in so with the americans, because they had felt the sting, but the start of the cold war changed the scene...
Forgive my long post and regards
Is this battle what inspired the Pearl Harbor attack?
Yes
To an extent- the Japanese wee already planning the attack, but Taranto certainly informed this plan
Historigraph I believe the technology used in the torpedoes which made them land in the water shallow enough that they didn't catch the anti torpedo nets was used by the Japanese for their Pearl Harbour torpedoes.
@@imergence9628 The torpedos at Taranto were set to run underneath the Torpedo nets, but in the end most of them weren't even deployed properly
Historigraph My misunderstanding sorry, I saw something on this subject a while ago so I must have forgotten the specifics
Virgin Pearl Harbor Attack vs Chad Battle of Taranto
Japan Navy learned from the Taranto attack
Japan has way more planes.
Instead of making my own historical commentary, I’ll talk about your video itself.
You describe things very well, speak clearly and your animations bring it all together in a manner that is both easy to follow and very interesting to watch. Great video! This the first of yours that I have seen, but consider me subscribed.
Italy: pfft, biplanes can’t do any shit to our battleships.
Swordfish Pilots: hold my beer
(yet fields the last biplane fighter to enter serial production, the CR42)
Battle of Taranto was the basis of Pearl Harbor attack., The Japanese studied this event very closely and applied what they learned to Pearl. Biplanes Swordfish and Fairey were not proof to AA, shells just pass thru, unless main spar of load bearing structure was hit, they, mostly Swordfish kept on going.
The Japanese didn't study Taranto closely enough, since they ignored the U.S. navy's fuel storage tanks
My father was at Aviano air base in Italy in 50's. He spent at least half his life living in Italy thus he met, and drank with, many WWII veterans. This is just one of his stories.
He once told me how he met a man who when he was inducted into the Italian military lied when they asked what he knew how to do and said he was a navigator. Thus he got onto a ship as a navigator without having a clue what he was doing.
The man was at this battle on the Italian side.
He described the Italian navy as being commanded by well to do dandies from rich and noble families who got their appointments mostly via social family status rather than talent, experience, or knowledge.
The greatest concern for command level types was having their manservant tend to their attire and take part in fine dining events. They were not very good commanders it seems.
I am proud of my half Italian heritage, yet, we should be grateful for these kinds of mistakes by the Italian navy in WWII.
Every video that includes the operations of the Swordfish always mention how obsolete they were, yet this is the same aircraft that seemed to create miracles at Taranto and against Bismarck.
2nd Battle Guadalcanal please! One of the few Battleship vs. Battleship engagements of WW2!
1st as well, the cruisers of the Japanese absolutely wrecked the Allies.
@@michelangelobuonarroti4958 Montemayor already made a video about that
ua-cam.com/video/XWEEHOKcTnA/v-deo.html
@@principalityofbelka6310 Ah yeah right. I actually am subscribed to him, dunno, thought it might be cool if he did one as well.🤷🏽♂️
@@michelangelobuonarroti4958 The Bismarck operation was the first (and second) battleship v battleship engagement of WW2. The USA and Japan were not even in the war at that point.
Who would win?
- three of the finest and most modern battleships in all of the world, each weighing tens of thousands of tonnes of solid steel
- some stringy bois
Littorio & Victorio Veneto were very modern ships. 40,000 tons, 9x 15" guns, 30 kts. They were sisters. Very dangerous to the Royal Navy!
@CipiRipi00;
Yes. I was just saying she was a modern ship. Not a WW1 ERA ship.
Who cares. The stringy bois won
@CipiRipi00 ;
That's what I was saying.
What a video! Love every single piece of your content, keep up the great work!
Some meme I saw....
Girlfriend: Has boobs, Scared of spiders, Made of flesh
Swordfish: Has torpedo, Will sink the most feared battleship, Made of paper thin fabrics that can withstand antiflak guns
wtf is an antiflak gun?
@@rankovasek1987 i think he wants to say anti air guns
I would just like to say how much I enjoy your videos. You may not post a lot, but when you do the video is amazing. I, and most likely a majority of other viewers, like your quality over quantity content. Keep it up.
A good book "To War in a Stringbag" by Commander Charles Bentall Lamb DSO DSC Royal Navy (1914-1981)
Can I propose you do a video on attack on Mers el Kebir? Maybe even German ships crossing of the Channel?
I'd like to learn more on the crossing of the channel, these visual guides are always quite helpful in visually illustrating them and I feel it's a bit more complex than some other naval battles and raids. Mers el Kebir would be interesting too.
Brilliant video, thank you. My stepdad served on HMS Victorious for 18 months as a Leading Aircraftsman, working on Swordfish. He said they were just brilliant planes that could take so much more punishment than later planes to be issued.
Ironic, considering bi-planes were what the Italian air force wanted to use going into the war. Bi-planes were their thing, and bi-planes were their undoing. :P It's surprising how strangely effective they were at certain niches. The maneuverability and nimbleness at slow speeds supposedly tripped up a lot of the 'regular' fighters of the day at first, it required a different kind of strategy to fight them. Italian fighters did well for a little while early in the war, though that didn't last long. Sometimes no armor is best armor.
It has been said that if Italy just had a few more months, they would've been able to start mass producing the MC. 205.
@@Kardia_of_Rhodes I'm very skeptical about Italy's production capacity, though they seem to have had their shit together when it came to aircraft. There were some notable speed records set by Italian pilots before the war, it's really the army that was the red-headed step child it seems, yet it was the army that had to shoulder most of the burden. If Germany weren't so proud and fixated on their own designs, there could be so a lot more of those babies around today.
It's pretty nuts how quickly the Italian pilots took to the aircraft and started performing so much better. Dunno if much would've been changed in the war itself, but the perceptions of the Italians in the war might've.
@Fuzzy Dunlop Well spoken and nice quote from Phly Daily
It should be noted in the early defense of Malta the British had Floater Gladiators. Three; Faith,Hope, and Charity. Basic equivalents to Fiat Cr42. Also a small number of both operated in early desert campaigns.
@@fuzzydunlop7928 To be fair the Italians as a people were not really into going into or fighting a war. It was there egotistic leader Mussolini that dragged them into it.
Underrated channel! Love your videos btw
thanks!
I wanted to sub only to see i already did
My great uncle was a gunner in this raid!
He must have been Italian. The Swordfish that attacked Taranto only carried the pilot and a navigator, the gunner was replaced by an extra fuel tank.
Didn't do a very good job then did he lmao (i'm just playing around pls don't get offended)
The Swordfish was neither ancient nor obsolete when it was used in the raid on Taranto......People always assume that because it is a biplane it "must" be ancient...it first flew in 1934, roughly the same time as the PBY Catalina, less than 2 years before the Spitfire, the Messerschmitt Bf109, the Hurricane, the B17 bomber and the He111 bomber.....and you'd hardly describe any of those as ancient or obsolete, would you? It sank more Axis shipping than any other aircraft, and actually outlived in service the aircraft designed and intended to replace it......it remained in service throughout the war, and did everything(and more) it was required to do........gave incredible and magnificent service and filled any number of maritime roles, dont care what it looks like, can it do the job? Yes it can, and it did...........
The Swordfish could be repaired by a well-equipped dressmaker.
yes, effective engineering has to be seen in the whole process....
I can imagine The Japanese looking at this raid and stroking their goatees and going 'hmmm maybe we can do the same Hawaii'
They definetly took notes.
Exept for the part about blowing up the oil storages.
That was one of their major oversights at Pearl Harbour.
At 4:00 you can see the name "Lamb" on the first wave.
That's Charles Lamb and I've read his book "War in a string bag". He did at lot of things during the war. He was sunk on the HMS Courageous, he flew secret missions into occupied Yugoslavia and North Africa and he he was captured and spent some time in a french POW camp Before returning back to active service.
Read it.
His book was one of the key sources for this video
Thank you- a favorite and inspiring story of mine (ever since a friend told me of it years ago). I’ve not tired of it yet and find myself saluting those brave men and now say, “thank you for my freedom,” to them. I say that as an American because it took the Allies.
Seeing a lot of Italian memeage and disregard going on in the comments so I'll do my spiel. There is a lot of skewed understanding in the popular historiography in relation to the Italians in the war - neither the Allies nor the Germans were especially keen to accentuate Italian positives, but they sure accentuated the negatives. The Germans often used them - not always unfairly - as scapegoats and threw them into unwinnable situations, sacrificial rearguard actions. The Allies already looked down on Italians in general before the war (as one newspaper headline would read from the Economist before the war "Mussolini is unwopping the wops"), the Allies had some built up prejudice from immigrant influx to harness as a propaganda tool when it became clear that Mussolini wasn't their buddy after-all, though by this time they'd mostly gotten away from going after the Italians as a people in the same way they did the Japanese - they didn't dehumanize them but the caricature of the bumbling day-laborer persisted and fit the "The Italian Heart is Not In This Fight" propaganda campaign that was underway during the war in North Africa.
This crept into the historiography, aggravated by German officers - like Halder (who for a time was an official US Army historian for the war after its end) - that repeated the skewed German recollection and it matched with the Allied perspective surprisingly well, leading us to disregard the Italians in our popular historiography of the war. "Why pay attention to them, they were just patsies!" Sadly, this attitude led to a number of Italian war criminals going virtually uninvestigated and prosecuted after the end of hostilities and our general disregard of the Italian part to play in the war has led to a lesser understanding of the overall scope of the conflict - Italy was undoubtedly a major belligerent of the war yet they are perhaps the least studied of the bunch. Some Westerners will croak on about the Soviets being overlooked, and that is a ridiculous oversight in itself, but when the Curtain fell the archives opened up and it's led to a Renaissance in our understanding of the War in the East - and to the war overall. We can't let our inherent biases from the war itself allow us to overlook important facets of the war and assign a typecast to such a disparate entity as the Italian Forces in the Second World War.
Agree with these points- expect me to talk about this in future video
@@historigraph Can't wait for that video, I'm a big fan of your stuff. The past year I've made a concerted effort to try educate myself on the part the Italians played in the conflict, I was really ignorant and it bugged me. It was difficult at first to find good sources but it's like a treasure hunt, y'know?
As an Italian, thank you for your comment
Ok, I won't overlook Abyssinia or Greece or Somaliland or Taranto or the instant occupation by Germany after Sicily.
Swordfish was the A10 Warthog of it's day, everyone wanted rid of it... But tough as old boots and it just kept racking up the hits.
My Father in Law was a Wildcat and later Corsair pilot in the FAA and served both in the Med and Arctic convoys. A very intelligent, funny and self effacing man I was proud to call my friend. I remember being at his 80th birthday some years ago at a pub in Devon where he lived…it was a family and friends affair where the drink flowed and a good time was had by all. We knew of his wartime exploits but at the time did not know he had been awarded the DFC twice. Anyhow…there is a photo of him in the pub with his brother and some friends in 1943 in uniform home on leave. My son who was 12 at the time looks at the photo and says ….”Papa, you were very brave”. The jollity stopped for a second….he pointed over to a friend “Baggy” Woodward and said “…..I wasn’t brave, I had a superb fighter aircraft under me….his job was to fly low, slow and level into concentrated fire, remain calm and drop his torpedo……the bravest men I knew”. He was a stringbag pilot!
That was an amazing feat and took balls of steel to attempt. Thanks for the story...
Italy did have 2 aircraft carriers but they were not completed because Italy surrendered. They also had naval pilots who had been training on airfields marked with the length of the carriers in Reggine 2001s.
This channel is so underrated, it's unbelievable
Now that raid took guts! This and the Bismarck torpedo attacks are probably the gutsiest raid ever in WWII.
Italy's Pearl Harbour.My dad used to work on the Swordfish.He was in the Fleet Air Arm in the War.He said that he felt bad for the crews because they were sitting ducks being so slow.Great bravery displayed in WW2.
This makes me sad and angry and I'm not even Italian, what incompetence.
"What incompetence" - aim your blame at the command structure, when properly lead the Italians did well. Additionally, there is a lot of skewed understanding in the popular historiography in relation to the Italians in the war - neither the Allies nor the Germans were especially keen to accentuate Italian positives, but they sure accentuated the negatives. The Germans often used them - not always unfairly - as scapegoats and threw them into unwinnable situations, sacrificial rearguard actions. The Allies already looked down on Italians in general before the war (as one newspaper headline would read from the Economist before the war "Mussolini is unwopping the wops"), the Allies had some built up prejudice from immigrant influx to harness as a propaganda tool.
This crept into the historiography, aggravated by German officers - like Halder (who for a time was an official US Army historian for the war after its end) - that repeated the skewed German recollection and it matched with the Allied perspective surprisingly well, leading us to disregard the Italians in our popular historiography of the war. "Why pay attention to them, they were just patsies!" Sadly, this attitude led to a number of Italian war criminals going virtually uninvestigated and prosecuted after the end of hostilities and our general disregard of the Italian part to play in the war has led to a lesser understanding of the overall scope of the conflict - Italy was undoubtedly a major belligerent of the war what they are perhaps the least studied of the bunch. Some Westerners will croak on about the Soviets being overlooked, and that is a ridiculous oversight in itself, but when the Curtain fell the archives opened up and it's led to a Renaissance in our understanding of the War in the East - and to the war overall. We can't let out inherent biases allow us to do the same in this case.
Just wait till you see the rest of the war for Italy!
The Italians were brave and fought hard when led well, but in general they suffered from poor morale because of poor command. They surrendered often because they saw situation as them being ordered to fight to their deaths for little to no gain.
All entirely the fault of Mussolini.
His version of fascism espoused a bastardised version of Darwin’s ‘Survival of the Fittest’, which in his dumb bald head meant: troops don’t need training; once the bullets start firing their survival instinct will kick in and they’ll fight like fascist warriors.
Totally flawed thinking of course, but that’s why so many Italian units performed so badly in combat - they’d received zero training. Italian units that HAD been trained properly actually fought very well. Conclusion: Mussolini was an idiot.
@M.r. Moon go and study before farting from your mouth
Ah yes,the Illustrious
The carrier that forgot how to die
I'm quickly becoming a big fan of this channel. Already watched 5 or 6 videos. Keep them coming.
Great video! Excellent diagrams and use of icons - I know you weren't sure how to address the issues of pilot/navigator/callsign, having them all and then cutting to aircraft sillouettes was perfect!
A very daring and brave attack! A tribute to British naval aviation
You're amazing as usual XD
@@Jackilichous Here comes the grammar police arresting me for my criminal use of Your.... O_o
Mike Millanes It’s gone now XD
I thought the Swordfish also crippled the steering mechanism of the Bismark with a torpedo hit. Not bad at all for a biplane. The American Douglas TBD Devastator (and maybe Avenger too) got swept from the sky in the Battle of Midway. Couple that with both submarine and air dropped torpedoes that failed to perform in the first 2 years of the war and it is a miracle we survived. A lot of war contracts went to companies As political favors, JUST LIKE NOW.
During the Bismarck affair it was the Swordfish that crippled the Bismarck which delivered her to the guns of the home fleet. However on returning to Ark Royal they were re fuelled and re armed as they wanted to go again. It was Tovey who made them stand down as it felt that Bismarck had to be sunk by the approved method. Imagine what could have transpired if they were allowed to sortie once more ? It was quite possible that they could have sunk a crippled Bismarck. As we know that her fire control system had great difficulty dealing with the Swordfish.
Well given the fact the Bismarck's torpedo protection system worked quite well, I highly doubt it. The rudder hit was not the only hit, the one that hit the torp belt didn't achieve much.
Axis ship: Exists
Obsolete Wooden Biplane: "I'm about to end this ship's whole career!"
These Swordfish aircraft belonged in a museum by 1940.
How could these flyers even walk properly with balls so large?
Simon de Cornouailles god knows how they took off
@@tacoking380 Apparently conventional wisdom is being re-thought again, with the A-29 being considered for the new close air support plane. It kinda makes sense, when you have an f-whatever screaming along at nearly supersonic speed, it gets a quick pass to fire its missles and spit out a couple hundred rounds of 20mm rounds and its gone back to the ship for refueling and arming back up. The slower, cumbersome, prop driven A-29 will be able to loiter for a good long while, and take its targets out systematically. Either one would be bad enough, having to face off with, but ground troops like the Taliban or ISIS would be SOL with one of the A-29's circling like a buzzard, waiting to pick their bones.
Thank you..... this has always been the "unheard of " action I like to tell people about ( along with the battle of the Admin Box which my Dad was in ). Now I'll refer folk to this video.
10:00 A fantastic painting. It really captures the daring of the brave Swordfish crew
We have forgotten that at the beginning of WWII in Europe, most (not much, most) of the vaunted German SS went into battle on horseback. Most of the logistics was dependent on horse drawn carts.
The bullets just went through the Swordfish and left tiny holes, so you have to hit the pilot.
Anyone else love the idea of planes just skimming the water to avoid fire as just awesome.
What an incredible machine the Swordfish was, and this video is one of the best I've seen anywhere on any subject.
Fantastic video. I love your presentation style and the animations are clear and informative. Are you planning to cover some of the lesser know Naval Battles of the Mediterranean. Like Cape Matapan?
The swordfish is obsolete, but does the swordfish know it?
My uncle flew one of these during the war. He was an awesome guy. Loved him.
the Italian Pearl harbor! nice. ive never read anything about this strike until now. good upload:)
It’s really amazing how good the swordfish really was. Somehow it was considered obsolete but without it what would have sunk the effing Bismarck.
Like the Harrier, the Swordfish was a unique Naval aircraft that thumbed its nose at convention and was well loved by its crews and amazingly effective in the talented hands of Royal Navy aviators.
When it comes to wars throughout history I am an avid learner. When it comes to WWII I am a glutton. For all of my learning years from adolescence til my nearly 50 year mark I have taught out every possible avenue to gain more knowledge of battles I already know about. I am totally bewildered at how I have never heard of such a bold and audacious plan as this one! I dont know why this battle has never come across my field of learning?!?!? I am just amazed by this victory and I am an American. It takes a lot to impress us. This tactic was cursory warning at the new possibility of naval destruction by air. This was the prelude to Pearl Harbor and not a person with an imagination took aims at prevention. 🤔 Not to take away from this newfound bravery and victory I salute my brave British allies!💂♂️
There actually was an American Naval liason present on board the British flagship at the battle of Taranto, and after the battle he did make efforts to try and have improvements made to defenses at US naval bases such as Pearl Harbour, but sadly these fell on deaf ears. It was the Japanese observers in Taranto that took on board the lessons of the action.
The Battle of Taranto: Death by Swordfish
We Italians could seriously threaten English supremacy in the Mediterranean, we had the means and the men on the means but not in command of the same, the fact that we had contracted most of the fleet in a port, a poor tactical foresight that cost the life of many brave.
The lack of radars and carriers were a serious disadvantage too.
Was there not an airfield nearby to protect the harbor? I know it was a night attack but if the swordfish could operate in darkness surely something the Italians had could as well. Seems bizarre not to have seen anything from the RA at all..
@@qball1of1 Hello, the airports were there, what was missing was the radar that the Germans had but not the Italians, then it must be said that the huge mistake of anchoring almost all the battleships in Taranto was the cherry on top . even if the Italian secret services had questioned the high probability of an attack, our Admirals felt extremely safe and we know how it ended. By repeating myself we had great sailors and ships but very bad Admirals.
@@va64lentino Thanks for the reply, appreciated.
The Italian incompetence, seen both with naval and ground assets, reminds me of a quote: “a lion leading deer into battle is a more dangerous force than a deer leading lions”
When I was in 2nd grade my favorite library book to get was about the sinking of the Bismark, a Nazi battleship. It illustrated how the swordfish was able to be under the lowest angles of the anti-aircraft and that the torpedoes were extremely effective. Awesome planes.
People talk of the Italian As a failure in World War Two , But I look at it different.In many cases the Italians fought extremely hard and bravely and died for their country.Quite a few were brave enough and intelligent enough to realise they were fighting for the wrong reason.And on the wrong side.They had the guts to say no!Unlike The Germans who fought on knowing they would lose.Whom is the more intelligent?.I am not Italian But English.My father fought against the Italians
Fun fact: the Swordfish biplane caused the destruction of a greater tonnage of Axis shipping than any other allied aircraft.
And yet the Pearl Harbor raid wasn't as effective as this. All but one of the battle ships that were 'sunk' were back-up and shelling Japanese islands by 44.
(Pedantic mode on) Two battleships: The Arizona and Oklahoma. (Pedantic mode off)
In terms of casualties alone I'd think Pearl Harbour was certainly more effective. Then again, considering they had a few hundred where Britain had just 20, I know which one was more impressive and efficient to me. Britain also didn't get their entire empire toppled as a result of their attack.
@@maxjones503 it was also more impressive because of the tactical significance. Italy didn't have the industrial ability to repair or replace losses to its fleet. America did which made the raid on Toronto so much more tactically significant than Pearl Harbor as America could replace and repair any losses unlike the Italians.
The Italians also lost one battleship, and repaired the other two. And the British didn't have to cross thousands of miles of ocean for their suprise attack.
Still impressive, but the Pearl Harbour raid probably did more damage, and would have done even more if the Americans hadn't just sent out their carriers.
@@Healermain15 Both were important in their own ways. The Taranto raid effectively knocked the Italian Navy out of action for months during a critical phase of the war in the Med. By the time those vessels were able to sail again the Italians were suffering badly from a severe fuel shortage, which continued to affect their ability to wage a Naval war.
While the USA had an industrial base orders of magnitude higher than Italy, even the US could not churn out Battleships, these are long lead ships, and their guns are the longest lead items on those ships. The attack on Peral Harbour forced the USN to start thinking in terms of Carriers as a significant proportion of their Battleship strength was too severely damaged to fight in the short term.
While I think the USN would have gone Carrier by the end of the war even without the BB losses, those BB losses accelerated the process, and while big ships carriers do not require those 16 inch rifles... which take literally years to manufacture. In those days carriers were faster to build than Battleships, and as soon as the USN realised the day of the Carrier had arrived the US was able to churn them out at a frightening (for everyone else) rate. Without Pearl Harbours losses you could argue that it would have taken much longer for the USN to realise the fact that with new aircraft types the carrier had gone from being a support vessel to the major componant of a Battle Group....
A great story. Very well told. Many thanks.
The swordfishes speed was also a good thing the boats anti air guns weren’t ready for such a slow plane
Italians after the Taranto: *Oh*
I LIVE FOR THESE VIDEOS! SO SO GOOD. BLOODY GOOD JOB 👍🏼
A wonderful and well-made snippet of World War II in the Italian theater. Thank you.
It's inaccurate to describe the Swordfish as "chronically obsolete". It was a current design introduced at around the same time as the Hawker Hurricane, and at a higher unit cost.
It's more accurate to describe it as a specialised fleet-attack torpedo bomber . The torpedoes of the time had to be dropped at slow speed, and it was decided to prioritise range, robustness, stability, adaptability and slow takeoff speed. The Swordfish could take off from small carriers in conditions where other planes would have been out of operation.
The exceptional performance at Taranto and many other actions prove that the specification was well conceived. The Swordfish sank more enemy tonnage than any other Allied aircraft.
Fair enough, probably would choose my words differently if I made the video now
"Your getting old Swordfish"
"Bullllllshit"
Hope u like the commando reference
I thought "what, how did that happen" Then I heard British and the Italians and that explained it easily.
You talking about the airspeeds of Swordfish and what crazy maneuvers they could do reminds me of the documentary i saw of Werner Voß´s last airbattle against 7 enemy planes. his 3 decker was so maneuverable he could stop and turn midair and basicly do 360° no scopes....WITH A PLANE! Nothing can beat Biplanes or Triplanes in a dog fight when it comes to maneuverbility!
Shortly after the 7 minute mark the narration draws attention to a swordfish flown by Lt Charles Lamb. This pilot whom would turn into Commander Charles Lamb, wrote the book called "War in a Stringbag". It is the definitive account of the illustrious accomplishment of the Swordfish aircraft, not just within the context of the event here depicted, but detailing numerous aspects of it's service with the Fleet Air arm. Indeed these aircraft not only crippled a fleet at Taranto as so superbly demonstrated by Historigraph's presentation, but it was an aircraft that changed the course of the war. ;)
Lambs book was a key source for this video