Iconic Firepower: The Outstandingly Bad Mark 13 Torpedo

Apr 03, 2013 4 Comments by

By Barrett Tillman

The U.S. naval ordnance bureaucracy did some things well in WW II, and some things incredibly poorly—none moreso than torpedoes.  The failure to test a primary fleet weapon adequately—even after its failings were known—appeared criminally negligent.  Both submarine and aircraft torpedoes were scandalously ineffective in 1942-1943.

Product of an on-again, off-again program, the Mark 13 aerial torpedo was developed from 1927-1936, with fleet introduction in 1938.  Prone to failure upon water entry and thereafter, drop parameters were limited to 50 feet and 110 knots.  Naturally, “torpecker” crews were concerned about exposing themselves to flak, automatic gunfire, and enemy fighters under those conditions.  Even after wartime improvements, tests showed a 69% failure rate if dropped faster than 150 knots.

Lacking in the nautical brew was accountability. A U-boat historian has noted that German engineers who designed defective detonators went to prison, while ours became admirals.  In fact, the chief of the Navy Bureau of Ordnance when the Mark 13 was designed became Fleet Admiral William Leahy, President Roosevelt’s White House chief of staff.

Nearly all the torpedo innovations during WW II came from industry rather than the “ordies” at the Newport Torpedo Station.  The best example was the acoustic-homing “Fido” antisubmarine weapon, developed in part due to the fabulously beautiful and extremely smart actress Hedy Lamarr.

Several things could scuttle a torpedo: failure to run; erratic depth control; improper heading; and failure to explode.  Some just sank for no obvious reason.  Mark 13s did help sink some important ships, including the carrier Shoho at the Battle of the Coral Sea in May 1942, and the battleship Hiei off Guadalcanal in November. But as one TBF skipper said, a Mark 13 was apt to run “like a wild hippopotamus with its head above water,” veering any way but toward the target.

In vivid contrast, Japanese torpedoes proved supremely reliable and effective, even with smaller warheads than the American weapon.  The Mark 13’s counterpart, the early Type 91 dating from 1931, could be dropped safely from 200 feet at 175 knots, with wartime improvements ensuing.  Type 91s were used with devastating effect at Pearl Harbor, Coral Sea, Midway, and the Guadalcanal battles.

Late-war fixes finally made the Mark 13 a viable weapon.  The “ring tail” version with a shroud around the propellers and a cone protecting the nose did much to improve performance and accuracy.  Avengers sank Japanese carriers and battleships in 1944-1945 with reliability approaching 100 percent.

Perhaps most remarkably, the 13’s last combat use was against a North Korean dam in 1951 (Check out R.R. “Boom” Powell’s article, “The Last Torpedo” in the April 2013 issue of Flight Journal).

Featured News

About the author

Kate Pierpont is the Deputy Managing Editor at Air Age Media. She is responsible for ensuring the high quality of copy across Air Age's six print titles as well as online and marketing efforts.

4 Responses to “Iconic Firepower: The Outstandingly Bad Mark 13 Torpedo”

  1. Raymond A. Ketchledge says:

    Interesting article but has some errors. The torpedo nicknamed “Fido” was actually called a mine for security reasons as no other acoustically steered torpedo exisited at the time. It was tested in Long Island Sound and put into production immediately. 5000 were built prior to any use so its appearance would be sudden and no countermeasures (soundmakers) could be used. Its purpose was to seek and kill U-Boats which it did very well. Hedy Lamarr, who I admire, had nothing to do with it. It was designed by Western Electric research (later Bell Labs) and MIT. My father was a key developer of the acoustic steering used on “Fido”.

  2. Jim Preston says:

    Good article Kate. Anyone who has read Submarine books about WW ii, ie; The Wake of the Wahoo, saw the futility of the Sub Cmdrs using bad torpedoes n complaining about them with no results. How many subs did we lose because of these torpedoes ?

  3. Ray Panko says:

    Actually, there were two things going on at the back of the Mark 13 Mod 10 torpedoes introduced in 1944. First, there was a circular metal shroud ring shroud around the propellers. It was popularly called the ring tail. About ten inches tall, t was added primarily for underwater performance. British tests during the war showed that the ring tail added general stability in water, including critical roll stability. It also made depth-keeping easier by making the horizontal tail elevators more effective. (They had been too weak for good depth keeping.) Over the ring tail was placed a wooden tail assembly to help stabilize the torpedo during the drop. This was held on with wooden dowels and broke off upon hitting the water. Many writers confuse call the rear box assembly the shroud ring or ring tail despite the fact that it is obviously not a ring. In the front of the Mod 10 was a plywood “drag ring” that was called the cracker barrel. It also stabilized the torpedo in flight, added drag to slow the torpedo, reducing G shock on water entry. It also actively cushioned the water entry.

    I also concur with Raymond Ketchledge’s comments about the diminutive Fido and the fact that Hedy Lamarr had nothing to do with it. It had some good successes late in the war.

  4. Ray Panko says:

    Also, the comment about Admiral Leahy was a bit misleading. Leahy was head of ordnance from 1927 to 1931. Although the basic Mark 13 was designed and built before he left, the failures to test and improve it really came after his time. Also, he was not Roosevelt’s chief of staff. He was chief of staff for the three services, rather like today’s Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Copyright © 2014 Air Age Media. All rights reserved.