Comments by "Steve Valley" (@stevevalley7835) on "Basic Fleet Tactics - 1,000 years of holding the line" video.

@kemarisite and, just to complicate the torpedo issue, the TBD carried the torp in a...lets say "novel" manner, with the tail buried in the airplane's fuselage and the body of the torp angled downward, due to a theory that it would be advantageous for the torp to enter the water at an angle, rather than belly flop in. The British Mk 12 wasn't foolproof either, as the RN had it's own flirtation with magnetic pistols, which didn't work any better for them than they did for the USN. 20/20 hindsight would have the TBD designed for the Mk 12, which would probably work better for the plane due to less weight, and having the torp cinched up tight under the fuselage resulting in less drag. Then leave the magnetic pistols back at the torpedo warehouse. But all that requires about 6 years of 20/20 foresight from 1935 as the TBD was being developed. just as the Mk 12 was being designed.
2
@kemarisite I'm sure the TBF bay was designed for the Mk 13. I expect the Mk 13 was designed short and fat to fit the odd, eccentric, to say nothing of suggestive, way that the TBD carries it. Given the way the TBD carries the torp, putting the much longer Mk 12 in, the nose of the torp will hit the deck the moment the tail of the plane lifts during takeoff. Secondly, given the way the back end of the torp nests in the fuselage, it may have been impossible to move the back of the torp aft to balance it on the plane's center of lift. It would be easier to put a Mk 12 in a TBF: forget the weapons bay and shackle it under the fuselage, unless the ventral gun position doesn't leave enough deck clearance.
1