1943 US Carrier Torpedo/Bomber/Attack Aircraft Competition

Justo Miranda

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
2 December 2007
Messages
9,910
Reaction score
16,168
Website
www.amazon.com
Douglas BTD-1 Destroyer
 

Attachments

  • 396.jpg
    396.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 323
  • 397.jpg
    397.jpg
    1.3 MB · Views: 326
  • 398.jpg
    398.jpg
    580.5 KB · Views: 349
  • 399.jpg
    399.jpg
    550.5 KB · Views: 352
  • 400.jpg
    400.jpg
    198.1 KB · Views: 347
  • 402.jpg
    402.jpg
    240.7 KB · Views: 343
  • 403.jpg
    403.jpg
    322.1 KB · Views: 293
  • 404.jpg
    404.jpg
    549.2 KB · Views: 297
  • 405.jpg
    405.jpg
    560.5 KB · Views: 290
  • 406.jpg
    406.jpg
    307.6 KB · Views: 288
Post-2
 

Attachments

  • 407.jpg
    407.jpg
    138.5 KB · Views: 268
  • 408.jpg
    408.jpg
    298.6 KB · Views: 296
  • 409.jpg
    409.jpg
    276.7 KB · Views: 297
  • 410.jpg
    410.jpg
    205.1 KB · Views: 294
  • 411.jpg
    411.jpg
    489.3 KB · Views: 261
  • 412.jpg
    412.jpg
    483.7 KB · Views: 304
  • 413.jpg
    413.jpg
    453.9 KB · Views: 335
  • 517.jpg
    517.jpg
    242.2 KB · Views: 118
  • 518.jpg
    518.jpg
    698.9 KB · Views: 109
Douglas TB2D Skypirate
 

Attachments

  • 414.jpg
    414.jpg
    312.4 KB · Views: 302
  • 415.jpg
    415.jpg
    834.5 KB · Views: 239
  • 418.jpg
    418.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 229
  • 419.jpg
    419.jpg
    375.6 KB · Views: 225
  • 420.jpg
    420.jpg
    381.2 KB · Views: 226
  • 422.jpg
    422.jpg
    674.8 KB · Views: 231
  • 426.jpg
    426.jpg
    174.5 KB · Views: 267
  • 516.jpg
    516.jpg
    348.2 KB · Views: 114
Martin AM-1 Mauler
 

Attachments

  • 427.jpg
    427.jpg
    368.4 KB · Views: 276
  • 428.jpg
    428.jpg
    306.1 KB · Views: 265
  • 429.jpg
    429.jpg
    394.9 KB · Views: 251
  • 430.jpg
    430.jpg
    331.2 KB · Views: 243
  • 431.jpg
    431.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 220
  • 432.jpg
    432.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 201
  • 433.jpg
    433.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 202
  • 435.jpg
    435.jpg
    221.9 KB · Views: 198
  • 436.jpg
    436.jpg
    171.2 KB · Views: 209
  • 437.jpg
    437.jpg
    302.7 KB · Views: 232
Post 2
 

Attachments

  • 427.jpg
    427.jpg
    368.4 KB · Views: 260
  • 438.jpg
    438.jpg
    407.1 KB · Views: 239
  • 439.jpg
    439.jpg
    579.9 KB · Views: 236
  • 440.jpg
    440.jpg
    283.1 KB · Views: 235
  • 441.jpg
    441.jpg
    420.3 KB · Views: 220
  • 442.jpg
    442.jpg
    202.4 KB · Views: 207
  • 443.jpg
    443.jpg
    181 KB · Views: 243
  • 490.jpg
    490.jpg
    796.3 KB · Views: 77
  • 491.jpg
    491.jpg
    453 KB · Views: 89
Hi,

Martin also submitted a proposal for VSB competition ?!.
 
Any further info on the Hall submission would totally make my day. Heck, my month!
 
Hi,

Martin also submitted a proposal for VSB competition ?!.

My dear Antonio,

I think you sent a PDF file before,contain a drawings to the competitors to this contest or anther one here,but I can't find it in my files ?.
 
Last edited:
Hi,

Boeing Model-289 was submitted to SD-119-3,as a bomber and torpedo
aircraft competition VB-VT,never heard about it before ?.
 
Hi,

Boeing Model-289 was submitted to SD-119-3,as a bomber and torpedo
aircraft competition VB-VT,never heard about it before ?.

I want to ask,if there was also "SE" series of Specifications with "SD" or not ?.
 

Attachments

  • 454.jpg
    454.jpg
    1.7 MB · Views: 85
  • 455.jpg
    455.jpg
    1.8 MB · Views: 76
  • 456.jpg
    456.jpg
    1.9 MB · Views: 75
  • 457.jpg
    457.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 79
  • 458.jpg
    458.jpg
    330.4 KB · Views: 81
  • 459.jpg
    459.jpg
    683.8 KB · Views: 81
  • 460.jpg
    460.jpg
    543.1 KB · Views: 78
  • 461.jpg
    461.jpg
    725.7 KB · Views: 74
  • 462.jpg
    462.jpg
    837.5 KB · Views: 82
  • 463.jpg
    463.jpg
    1,010.4 KB · Views: 81
Post-3
 

Attachments

  • 464.jpg
    464.jpg
    790.5 KB · Views: 81
  • 465.jpg
    465.jpg
    570.6 KB · Views: 69
  • 466.jpg
    466.jpg
    966 KB · Views: 74
  • 467.jpg
    467.jpg
    436.5 KB · Views: 75
  • 468.jpg
    468.jpg
    466.2 KB · Views: 77
  • 469.jpg
    469.jpg
    2.7 MB · Views: 77
  • 470.jpg
    470.jpg
    658.5 KB · Views: 74
  • 471.jpg
    471.jpg
    596.2 KB · Views: 77
  • 472.jpg
    472.jpg
    373.4 KB · Views: 79
Brewster Buccaneer/Bermuda
 

Attachments

  • 530.jpg
    530.jpg
    328.5 KB · Views: 104
  • 531.jpg
    531.jpg
    564.6 KB · Views: 86
  • 532.jpg
    532.jpg
    619.3 KB · Views: 87
  • 533.jpg
    533.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 89
  • 534.jpg
    534.jpg
    481.6 KB · Views: 92
  • 535.jpg
    535.jpg
    656.8 KB · Views: 88
  • 536.jpg
    536.jpg
    460 KB · Views: 100
  • 537.jpg
    537.jpg
    1.5 MB · Views: 98
  • 538.jpg
    538.jpg
    845.9 KB · Views: 105
  • 539.jpg
    539.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 96
If you've got plenty of money to burn and want to purchase something really original and unique, you can always purchase an original identification plate from the XBTK-1 on eBay... for 1100 bucks!

1752790375842.jpeg
 
Not many planes to be salvaged here; lot of waste. Was any of these planes good ? And then the Skyraider flattened every single of them.
<snip>
10 failures to get the Skyraider, that's a pretty wasteful way of proceeding.
I wouldn't say that. Waste was pretty much irrelevant to the US war effort at the time, as long as it facilitated huge production volume. Moreover, each of the AD's direct contenders had attractive attributes. For example:

* The BTK was smaller than the AD. It could use the tried and tested R-2800, which would make maintenance and spares supply easier. It also might be possible to fit more of them aboard carriers, which could be important given if single-engined, single-seat bombers suffered higher than anticipated attrition.

* The heavy-weight AM could carry more ordinance and, presumably, fuel which would increase mission flexibility and improve combat effectiveness (fewer sorties against given objectives, etc.). It needed the newest and most powerful available engine, the promising R-4360--attractive, but so new that it presented considerable development risk.

* The AD was the middle-weight, which might have seemed the best of both worlds. But it used the R-3350, an engine that had a sad history of development and design problems, even if those were largely resolved.

So I can understand why the USN would cover its bets in the way it did. In hindsight, the AD seems to have been the obvious best choice. But at the time, the AD's long history of satisfactory service did not yet exist. In the run-up to the anticipated invasion of Japan, the USN faced challenges that the AD's later wars never presented. So it must have been hard know what would be best.

 
10 failures to get the Skyraider, that's a pretty wasteful way of proceeding.
It didn't help that they ran the competition for a two seat dive-bomber right through to building prototypes, and then decided to go for single-seaters instead.
 
Most of the contracts make some degree of sense to me. But I'm amazed Curtiss got one for the XBTC-2 after all the trouble with the SB2C Helldiver and a series of disappointing prototypes. And then a few months later they got another contract for the XBT2C-1 for the same Navy requirement for a new dive/torpedo bomber.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom