Motor Torpedo Boats and Anti-Submarine Warfare

[Gunnarr]

I am trying to find information for motor torpedo boats and anti-submarine warfare.

How often were they used in such a manner? Were they effective in such a manner?

How often were they equipped with radar/sonar, or depth charges?

How many u-boats were sunk by torpedo boats?

[Gunnarr]

so far searching uboat.net, I find I-3 Japanese submarine sunk by torpedo, and U-561 sunk in Mediterranean by torpedo

what I am really wondering is, did they have any capability of sonar or ASDIC? or even radar? I am having trouble finding actual sources. I see that US failed using sonar in PT boats because the engine was too loud. But I want to know fore sure

[Commander Wallace]

Try checking out this website

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=vospers+pt+boats&oq=vospers+pt+boats&gs_l=news-cc.12..43j43i53.3991.8055.0.10129.16.4.0.12.12.0.1 07.400.1j3.4.0...0.0...1ac.1.MqQadoyGE-k&gws_rd=ssl#q=vospers+pt+boats&hl=en&gl=us&authuser=0


and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_Torpedo_Boat


Generally the MTB-motor torpedo boats and MGB's-motor gun boats were built by Vospers in England.The U.S navy had Pt boats built by Elco

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PT_boat

The MTB's had the benefit of having the torpedo tubes mounted in the bow instead of the tubes being mounted on the deck as with PT boats.

PT boats had a high mortality rate when they launched torpedo attacks in highly defended estuaries when the splash made by the torpedo's were heard and shore batteries opened up on them. MTB's torpedo attacks were a bit less difficult since there were no splashes from torpedo's hitting the water.


Hope this and the web sites helps.

[Sailor Steve]

The U.S navy had Pt boats built by Elco
And Higgins. Don't want to get on McBee's wrong side.

And Huckins. Don't forget Huckins.

The MTB's had the benefit of having the torpedo tubes mounted in the bow instead of the tubes being mounted on the deck as with PT boats.
:-?

Vosper MTBs had the tubes on the deck, in the same locations as the US PTs.

PT boats had a high mortality rate when they launched torpedo attacks in highly defended estuaries when the splash made by the torpedo's were heard and shore batteries opened up on them. MTB's torpedo attacks were a bit less difficult since there were no splashes from torpedo's hitting the water.
I've been a fan of fast torpedo boats for a very long time, and I've never heard that. Source, please?

[MaDef]

PT's weren't designed for anti-sub warfare so as far as I know they didn't have sonar. They were equipped with radar, and couple that with their high speed & shallow draft they were very effective against supply barges.

[Commander Wallace]

And Higgins. Don't want to get on McBee's wrong side.

And Huckins. Don't forget Huckins.


:-?

Vosper MTBs had the tubes on the deck, in the same locations as the US PTs.


I've been a fan of fast torpedo boats for a very long time, and I've never heard that. Source, please?

You're right Steve . I knew there were other manufactures of PT boats but couldn't remember them offhand . There well may be others who manufactured them too under the name of those manufactures.

https://books.google.com/books?id=IBwY6No17EkC&pg=PA14&lpg=PA14&dq=bow+torpedo+tubes+on+Vosper+MTB+boats&source=bl&ots=axqIlhKkPk&sig=ujX4PCw2j7_1egBa5L8VnGusQqE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CD8Q6AEwB2oVChMI1M-EoYyayAIViweSCh1F4At4#v=onepage&q=bow%20torpedo%20tubes%20on%20Vosper%20MTB%20boat s&f=false

This site and others agree with the placement of the tubes on deck but I will look for the book I have that details some placements in the bow. One American PT boat Commander lamented the fact that torpedo attacks would have been easier if all tubes were in the bow. If I remember right, this placement was on bigger boats.

Like you, I had always thought the tubes were mounted topside. The web sites I have seen show the tubes topside. Maybe the book I have is wrong. The book also detailed the ramming of a obsolete destroyer, the Campbeltown, transferred to England from the U.S under lend lease into locks at St. Nazaire in France to deny Germany the ability to service Tirpitz and other Battleships. A MTB and MGB participated as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Nazaire_Raid

http://www.mtb102.com/
This site details bow mounted torpedo tubes
If anyone else has information, please post.

[Sailor Steve]

One American PT boat Commander lamented the fact that torpedo attacks would have been easier if all tubes were in the bow. If I remember right, this placement was on bigger boats.
The German S-boote had the tubes mounted internally, firing straight forward.

The book also detailed the ramming of a obsolete destroyer, the Campbeltown, transferred to England from the U.S under lend lease into locks at St. Nazaire in France to deny Germany the ability to service Tirpitz and other Battleships. A MTB and MGB participated as well.
A well-known incident. One of our better writers even included the raid as part of his ongoing u-boat story.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=83139

This site details bow mounted torpedo tubes
If anyone else has information, please post.
It uses the term "originally". It could mean that it was tested in that configuration, or it could mean they did indeed have some boats in service that way.

The original Torpedo Boat Destroyers had a bow-mounted internal tube in 1893. Their experience was that even with the tube cap closed water tended to spray all over the ship. Later classes dropped the bow tube.

During World War 1 the British had Coastal Motor Boats, which would drop one or two torpedoes from the stern and then turn to get out of their way.
http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1560&Itemid=417

[Gunnarr]

Hello again!

I am mostly interested in its anti-submarine capabilities. The reason I ask is in a game called Hearts of Iron III, there is a mod called Black Ice.

It is a grand strategy game.

But I have a disagreement with the mod maker. In the mod there are two different types of this sort:

Motor Torpedo Boat

and

Torpedo Boat

---

The Motor Torpedo Boat seems to represent the smaller types, while the Torpedo Boat seems to represent the larger types.

Now look at these technologies for these boats:

http://blackicemod.com/doc/technologies/smallship_folder

Every few years you can research such technologies. Anyway, Motor Torpedo Boats (such as representing a PT boat) is effective at hunting and destroying submarines in this mod. I believe that motor torpedo boats should be ineffective at destroying submarines. In fact, in these technologies that can be researched I do not think motor torpedo boats even had some of these technologies able to be implemented because of their small size.

When I questioned that motor torpedo boats should be effective at destroying subs, the mod maker stated that there is no discussion to be had. If you are in a submarine and you come across a few motor torpedo boats with depth charges you are "in for a bad time". This mod strives to achieve historically accurate results. But then certainly aircraft and destroyers should be the most effective at hunting submarines, not torpedo boats?

I disagree with what he stated, because how will these boats know where to drop their charges? and they only are equipped with 4 depth charges sometimes. So how can they be anywhere near as effective as Destroyers? I cannot find evidence yet that they were equipped with Hydrophones (as the mod gives them)


So I want to know your opinions

[Sailor Steve]

I remember reading a long time ago that the reason MTBs and PTs carried a few depth charges was to discourage destroyers from getting to close. One of those things at shallow depth can peel a tin can like...well, a tin can.

The bad news is that I don't remember where I read it. :dead:

[TorpX]

They may have been equipped with DC's because of the peculiar conditions of the Solomans campaign. When the Japanese were trying to supply, reinforce, or evacuate their troops, they used an odd assortment of craft, including destroyers, small boats, barges, and submarines on an ad hoc basis, to accomplish the task. PT boats patrolled to interfere with this, and also to defend local anchorages, so they might encounter subs in shallow water, or at night on the surface.

I agree with Gunnarr, though; as a general purpose ASW vessel, they would leave a lot to be desired.

[nikimcbee]

so far searching uboat.net, I find I-3 Japanese submarine sunk by torpedo, and U-561 sunk in Mediterranean by torpedo

what I am really wondering is, did they have any capability of sonar or ASDIC? or even radar? I am having trouble finding actual sources. I see that US failed using sonar in PT boats because the engine was too loud. But I want to know fore sure

There were the PTCs that had a depth charge configuration.
http://pt-king.gdinc.com/PTC's.html
They didn't have sonar, so depth charging a sub is blind luck. They weren't effective as an ASW platform.
The few Huckins boats that were built were used as training boats (see movie "They were Expendable." Most of those boats were Huckins as they have a funky looking bow.

Like Sailor Steve said, most PTs had a pair of DCs to scare off destroyers following them.
PT-boats would terrorize the Jap sub supply operations, but this isn't true asw warfare.

[nikimcbee]

https://ptboatred.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/pt-officers-inspect-depth-charges.jpg?w=300&h=248

PT-107
http://www.navsource.org/archives/12/120510702.jpg

http://666kb.com/i/bu8jw6yqbk3kacsfz.jpg

[nikimcbee]

http://www.navsource.org/archives/12/05idx.htm

[Gunnarr]

In that last link is the website broken ? I cannot view the tactics part