If I'm reading some of these sources correctly, we still had Mk 14 torpedoes *in service* in the 80's and there are conflicting sources that say we either still have them in storage or transferred them to foreign users (evidently the Mk 14 is still in use in some places). So I'm wondering, with the whole leveling effect and such, how difficult would it be to take those out of storage, fit airdrop kits to them, and use them from A-10's as torpedo bombers. In fact, I would think that the A-10 would be a brutally effective anti-abyssal platform. Massive ordnance capacity (load them up with slicks or aforesaid Mk 14 airdrop kit... Boeing would be hungry to develop something like that, I'm sure)... and the GAU-8 is different only in rate of fire from late-war heavy caliber air-to-surface artillery ordnance. I would imagine that the GAU-8 would, even after the leveling effect, be no less effective than the 75mm howitzer on the solid-nosed B-25's...
The Mark 14 was completely withdrawn from service by the 80s; it had been replaced by the Mark 48 and later the Mark 48 ADCAP. There's also the problem that it's too heavy to be an airdropped torpedo: note the difference in weight and dimensions. It's 1000 lbs heavier and 7 feet longer than the air-dropped Mark 13 torpedo. At
3154 lbs before any theoretical airdrop kit is attached, it is simply too heavy and too large to be mounted to the A-10's centerline station, or indeed
any centerline station on
any US tactical aircraft - the strongest hardpoints are rated for
2000lbs loads, being the Mark 84 bomb (and Paveway/JDAM variants) and the US 600 gallon drop tanks and buddy refuelling tanks. So you can't really fit it to any aircraft to drop it, and that's before you run into the problem of "can you sucessfully airdrop this weapon in the first place?"
I mean, really, if you're going to suggest airdropped unguided torpedoes, a better option would be the Mark 13. Given that you're going to have have to make them new
anyway whichever torpedo you choose - Mark 14 or Mark 13 - you might as well go for the actual airdropped torpedo.
There's also the problem here that you're getting air force ground attack pilots to do torpedo bombing, which is hilariously outside their remit. It would make more sense to have P-3 Orion and P-8 Poseidon crews be doing the torpedo bombing, because guess what? A P-3 is basically a super Catalina. A modern day maritime patrol aircraft, filtered through the lens of WW2, is very good naval torpedo bomber. These are Navy crews who have trained for the maritime strike mission who know how to torpedo bomb people.
What I'm trying to do is recreate a WW2 land-based torpedo bomber with minimal airframe changes, a ersatz Beaufighter so to speak. Not to create something overpowered and out of context.
Uh, yeah, that's basically what the P-3 is? It pretty much replaced the USN's land-based patrol bomber/ASW aircraft inventory. There's a reason it's taken so long for a replacement for it to come about, and that's because the P-3 is
damn good at what it does.
Fine, last time I attempt to contribute to discussion.
Flouncing out with your wounded pride does you or no one any favors. Don't sulk.
Ok, so the A-10 won't work for ships with high AA, but what about ones that don't? I thought someone mentioned pre-dreadnoughts and WW1 era designs are also being used by the Abyssals. Since they don't have that much AA, would an A-10 be useful at that?
I'm not trying to drag on a discussion or get the thread locked, but, aside from Missouri, are there any weapons that humans have that are effective at all against Abyssals?
@theJMPer once mentioned that P-3s were pretty effective, because, as I've said before, maritime patrol aircraft make for kickass naval patrol bombers. The P-3 Orion is basically a super Catalina/Harpoon/Neptune. Only problem is that the modern air-dropped torpedo has a fairly small warhead, since nobody seriously uses torpedoes against ships, as antiship missiles are superior in that regard. I quote myself:
Helicopters slinging ASW torps have been a thing for decades. Like the Mark 46 was basically designed to fit into ASROC (to throw it out longer ranges so that a DD/FFG/DDG/CG could threaten subs) and was light enough to be helicopter-carried so that ASW Sea Kings/Seahawks could carry a couple of them while they went subhunting and then drop them onto the sub. That was going on since like the 70s.
Now that's all fine and well for antisubmarine work, you can literally fly a helo right on top of a sub and drop a torp on it, because unless the sub is carrying MANPADS and surfaced it can't threaten the helo. That doesn't work for surface warships, where even the crappiest AA defense - a bunch of dudes manning HMGs - is sufficient to threaten a helicopter. Then you gotta fly close in, and then you gotta drop the torp and then the torp is barely faster than the surface ship... the Mark 54 torp, for instance, does 40 knots, while Penguin is at least 15 times faster, being high subsonic. Penguin's range might be shit, but it's still a lot better than the Mark 54 as well.
Against surface warships, a swarm of helos with torps are a nuisance. Against submarines... that's a whole different ballgame.
