A connected technology profile

Type 91 aerial torpedo

“Type 91” described a family of weapons. Hiryū’s own expenditure record identifies which modification her torpedo aircraft used at Midway.

Profile · Evidence and limits

The weapon in the sortie record

Hiryū’s second-counterattack table records nine Type 91 modification 3 torpedoes expended. The formation contained nine attack aircraft from Hiryū and one from Akagi; the note says the Akagi aircraft did not release its weapon. Ten aircraft therefore did not mean ten torpedoes launched. M41

That wartime entry establishes use. For the weapon’s characteristics, a different source is needed: the United States Naval Technical Mission to Japan’s March 1946 investigation, assembled through interviews with Japanese technical personnel and collected information. It is a postwar technical report, not a return from the Midway attack. M60

Keeping the weapon steady

The investigation describes the importance of roll control in achieving a reliable transition into the underwater run. Its account credits the anti-roll system with addressing the tendency to turn off course on entry. This was one part of making an aerial torpedo useful; it could not guarantee a hit against a manoeuvring ship. M60

For modification 3, the report gives an explosive charge of about 240 kilograms. Its narrative uses 528 pounds and Table I rounds the figure to 530. Neither number is the weight of the complete torpedo: the same table separately lists 1,870 pounds for the whole weapon. These are the investigation’s technical particulars, not measurements of the nine individual weapons released at Midway. M60

Which modification matters

The report dates modification 3 to 1942, the Improved version to 1943 and the Strong version to 1944. Later strengthening and different launch limits belong to that development sequence. Applying a later version’s capabilities to every weapon labelled Type 91 would misrepresent what the Midway record establishes. M60

What the target tells us

Yorktown’s damage report describes port-side aerial-torpedo damage, flooding and loss of power. That provides evidence of effects aboard the target, separately from Hiryū’s expenditure and hit claims. The subsequent submarine attack belongs to another episode and must not be counted as the aerial weapon’s achievement. M18

Read Hiryū Fights Back for the attack and the Mark 13 profile for the American weapon’s difficulties. Reliable running, tactical opportunity and damage caused are separate parts of the comparison.

Evidence within reach

Sources for this page

Open a note for the passage, inspection status and limits. Source records link to the available documents.

M41First Air Fleet report: Hiryū’s weapon expenditure

Contemporary Japanese command report · archival scan, part 4

Passage: PDF p.3 / stamped 0158: Type 91 modification 3 and nine weapons expended

Recorded bomb categories, torpedo modification and expenditure in Hiryū’s two counterattacks.

Checked: Retained Japanese pages 1 and 3 re-rendered and visually inspected on 18 October 2026; selected fields only. Full 58-page research copy retained from 17 October.

Limits: Working readings, not a certified complete translation. Same report family as M14/M06. Expenditure is not magazine stock, hit count or a complete technical specification. Enemy identifications and damage claims are not accepted uncritically. Japanese report dates are not silently merged with American local dates.

View full source record →
M60Japanese Torpedoes and Tubes · Article 2: Aircraft Torpedoes

Postwar technical investigation · archived scan of report O-01-2

Passage: Introduction; printed pp.8–11 / PDF pp.9–12: stabilisation, modification chronology and Table I

Type 91 modification chronology, anti-roll discussion and technical particulars; distinction between modification 3 and later Improved/Strong versions.

Checked: PDF pp.1–4 and 6–14 visually inspected on 18 October 2026. The introduction identifies interviews as the basis of the investigation. Table I checked against the modification narrative.

Limits: Postwar investigation drawing on Japanese technical personnel, not a wartime sortie record. Hiryū’s actual use is established separately by M41. Narrative gives 528 lb for modification 3 explosive charge; Table I rounds to 530 lb, distinct from 1,870 lb total weapon weight. Technical figures are not measurements of Midway weapons. Interview hit claims and later launch limits are not adopted. Original host denied retrieval; archived copy retained.

View full source record →
M18Yorktown’s damage report

Technical report · third-party scan extract

Passage: PDF pp.4–5 / printed pp.1–2: Yorktown’s aerial-torpedo damage

The sequence of damage, recovery, interrupted salvage and loss of Yorktown. Fuel precautions, flight-deck repair, boiler recovery, loss of power and abandonment.

Checked: PDF pages 4 and 17 visually inspected; other text selectively examined. PDF pp.4–5 rendered and visually rechecked on 18 October 2026 for Hiryū Fights Back. PDF p.6 / printed p.3 visually inspected for towing, salvage, the submarine attack and final loss. Supporting-ship update: PDF p.6 visually rechecked for Vireo’s tow and Hammann’s salvage assistance.

Limits: Relies on officers’ reconstructed recollections after records were lost. Cover publication date and complete plate set are absent from the retained extract. Draws on the captain’s submissions, so is not independent corroboration of M04. Its 1645 torpedo-hit time differs from M04’s approximately 1620, and its 23-degree abandonment list differs from M04’s 26 degrees. The paragraph 10 elapsed-time arithmetic is inconsistent; no exact repair duration is inferred from it. The post-Hammann underwater explosion is tentatively attributed to depth charges, whereas M44 leaves the cause unresolved. The smaller list after the later attack did not mean improved overall buoyancy.

View full source record →

Photograph

Enlarged historical photograph

Web copy resized and compressed; original framing retained. Open image file ↗