• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Martin P6M Seamaster

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,012
Reaction score
481
In 1952 the US Navy put out a Request for Proposal to the US Aircraft industry asking for an advanced jet-powered 'Fast Mine-Laying Maritime Patrol Flying Boat'

The winner of this RfP was Martin with their P6M-1/2 SeaMaster design.
Unfortunatly this design did not go into full production, and only prototypes and development aircraft were built.

My question to you all out there - does any one have any info and pics or drawings of the other designs submitted to this Request for Proposal.
The only other design i know of was from Convair (designation unknown)

Thanks gents

Regards
Pioneer

P.S. I have not posted a picture of the SeaMaster, for I do not know how. Can anyone help me?
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
13,010
Reaction score
5,691
If you click "additional options" when you post, you should see the relevant options for posting images.
 

lark

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
1,812
Reaction score
108
Steve Ginter's Naval Fighters No34 about the
Convair XP5Y and R3Y-1/2 Tradewind
produces at the end of the book a few contenders
for the Martin Seamaster.
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,012
Reaction score
481
Thanks gents

Lark does this this book by Steve Ginter 'Naval Fighters No34' give the contenders designations, specifications, drawings etc.....
If so any chance of you posting them ?????

Regards
Pioneer
 

Antonio

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,556
Reaction score
363
Sea Master contenders?...drawings :eek:

Could you please give us more info?

Thanks a lot, Lark
 

lark

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
1,812
Reaction score
108
The book I mentioned is not at home for the moment.
But I'll try to do something in coöperation with Pometablava.
Give me a bit time...
 

RyanCrierie

Crazy Researcher
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
851
Reaction score
162
Website
www.alternatewars.com
I'm not sure whether there is a P6M thread, searched for it but didn't find any devoted specifically to it.

Found in the files at the Naval Historical Center in Washington DC; I can provide you with 600 DPI scans of the paintings if you want. ;D
 

Attachments

  • SupahSeaplane.jpg
    SupahSeaplane.jpg
    143 KB · Views: 1,592
  • P6MSub.jpg
    P6MSub.jpg
    96.9 KB · Views: 1,199
  • SubDiagram.gif
    SubDiagram.gif
    24.6 KB · Views: 1,017
  • SubReload.gif
    SubReload.gif
    22.7 KB · Views: 1,134

Rickshaw

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
2,072
Reaction score
177
What is the platform on the fuselage of the Seamaster in the first drawing for?
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,181
Reaction score
1,407
servicing platform for torpedo loading operations
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,772
Reaction score
2,099
flateric said:
servicing platform for torpedo loading operations

Almost. It's for mines and/or nuclear weapons loading; AFAIK, torpedoes were never part of the Seamaster's planned ordnance options.
 

Skybolt

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,299
Reaction score
178
Martin first proposed that kind of operation in 1948 using a diesel submarine and a turboprop attack seaplane. I have some drawings. Will post as son I find them.
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,181
Reaction score
1,407
TomS said:
flateric said:
servicing platform for torpedo loading operations

Almost. It's for mines and/or nuclear weapons loading; AFAIK, torpedoes were never part of the Seamaster's planned ordnance options.

Sorry, should have been check this before posting with my Stan Piet's Seamaster book.
 

RyanCrierie

Crazy Researcher
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
851
Reaction score
162
Website
www.alternatewars.com
flateric said:
Sorry, should have been check this before posting with my Stan Piet's Seamaster book.

Speaking of Stan Piet's, the Naval Historical Center has two copies of an excerpt from his book in their files; given to them by him, detailing a NUCLEAR POWERED P6M!.

Make the future Atomic! ;D :eek:
 

fredgell

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Jun 10, 2007
Messages
77
Reaction score
11
Orionblamblam said:
If you've found anything on the SeaMistress (the larger plane in the background), I'd love to see it...

Dont recognise the seamistress reference but the picture looked awfully familiar


Try "NASA TN D-529"
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?Ne=20&N=4294888984+211

The tunnel models and drawings for 500,000lb heavy lift flying boat.

Regards

Fred
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,181
Reaction score
1,407
Here happens what I have warned many of you about - lost pics from the third party site...
Did anyone save these pics? Post 'em right here, please, in new P6M Seamaster thread.

Original source and file names:

http://www.braynededesigns.com/MARTIN/331_01.jpg
http://www.braynededesigns.com/MARTIN/331_02.jpg
http://www.braynededesigns.com/MARTIN/331_03.jpg
http://www.braynededesigns.com/MARTIN/331_04.jpg
 

RyanCrierie

Crazy Researcher
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
851
Reaction score
162
Website
www.alternatewars.com
Excerpt from "THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SEAMASTER", a speech given by Werner F. Hess of the Martin Company to the Society of Automotive Engineers, Washington Chapter, on 19 February 1957:

The mine door is another interesting feature of the SeaMaster and presented, as you will see, some rather tricky problems. You will recall that the door is quite long and compares generally in sise with the bomb bay of any other aircraft of a similar dimension. The operation of the door is quite simple. When it is time to drop the stores, the mine door is rotated 180 degrees and held in that position. All the stores, which are carried on the inside bottom of the door can then be dropped by conventional techniques.

This arrangement has a very great advantage in that we do not expose the entire inside of the aircraft to severe air turbulence like that experienced with the conventional bomb bay with clam shell doors. In configurations of the latter type, the stores are often buffeted about and leave the aircraft with some erratic motions. However, tests with the P6M rotary door show that stores leave the aircraft very smoothly without any tendency to tumble or gyrate in any way. Actual drops were recorded by high speed slow motion cameras installed in the wing tip floats, but we could not show this film because of security.

The sealing problem on the mine door was difficult to solve. When the airplane lands, water pressures built up on the bottom of the hull are, as you might expect, quite high. Considerable effort went into designing or, you might say, inventing a seal system. The seal that was devised was a series of collapsible pneumatic tubes that inflate or deflate to seal the door or to release it to rotate. Even with a loss of air pressure in the tubes, the seal will remain tight under water pressure. This seal has proved to be satisfactory in every way and does not leak during landing, takeoff, or any time the aircraft is on the water.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOIA Memo found in NHC Files

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND
NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND HEADQUARTERS
WASHINGTON, DC 20361

IN REPLY REFER TO
AIR- 07D3
July 1983

MEMORANDUM

From: AIR-07D3 To: AIR-02E2

Subj : FOIA request, concerning seabased minelaying ASW aircraft (P6M Seamaster)

1. Subject request raised a question about the number of manufacturers involved in the. design competition for subject aircraft. By Bureau of Aeronautics letter AC-56, 09916 of 30 July 1951, the Navy invited twelve manufacturers to submit design proposals for subject aircraft. The twelve were:

Martin
CONVAIR
Bellanca
Chance Vought
Douglas
Edo
Fairchild
Grumman
McDonnell
Ryan
Sikorsky
Boeing

Only Martin and CONVAIR submitted proposals. The other ten manufacturers declined the Navy's invitation.

2. During the time that the competition for subject aircraft was in progress, there was a competition for a landbased minelaying ASW aircraft also in progress. Several more manufacturers were competing for the landbased design than for the seabased design. It is important not to confuse these two when reviewing their histories. Only Martin and CONVAIR submitted proposals for subject competition.

OR AS-04506 High performance seaplane minelayer
See: BUAER ltr AER-EV-1
11 Apr 1952
Evaluation Division file folder "Proposals 1951-1953"

/s/
Wm. J. ARMSTRONG
By Direction

--------------------------------------------------------------
 

RyanCrierie

Crazy Researcher
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
851
Reaction score
162
Website
www.alternatewars.com
Inflatable Docks! Secret hidden Submerged docks! ;D
 

Attachments

  • P6M Mobile Ramp.gif
    P6M Mobile Ramp.gif
    459.1 KB · Views: 576
  • BritMooring.gif
    BritMooring.gif
    63.6 KB · Views: 539
  • USRubberProposal.gif
    USRubberProposal.gif
    106.2 KB · Views: 764

Johnbr

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
758
Reaction score
198
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QowTqmxYZ1Q

He is video of the Seamaster.
 
J

joncarrfarrelly

Guest
flateric said:
Here happens what I have warned many of you about - lost pics from the third party site...
Did anyone save these pics? Post 'em right here, please, in new P6M Seamaster thread.

Original source and file names:

http://www.braynededesigns.com/MARTIN/331_01.jpg
http://www.braynededesigns.com/MARTIN/331_02.jpg
http://www.braynededesigns.com/MARTIN/331_03.jpg
http://www.braynededesigns.com/MARTIN/331_04.jpg

That was my site, here are the pics.

Jon
 

Attachments

  • 331_01.jpg
    331_01.jpg
    216.1 KB · Views: 390
  • 331_02.jpg
    331_02.jpg
    192.9 KB · Views: 525
  • 331_03.jpg
    331_03.jpg
    226.9 KB · Views: 365
  • 331_04.jpg
    331_04.jpg
    553.4 KB · Views: 406

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,012
Reaction score
481
Hay great find on the US Navy's Request For Proposals for the SeaMaster RyanCrierie!!!!!

Although I must say I have never heard of Bellanca nor Edo before!

Regards
Pioneer
 

XP67_Moonbat

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
2,164
Reaction score
98
Good a place as any to put this. Enjoy!
http://www.aviation-history.com/martin/p6m.html
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
876
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Included in the 1953 Martin study was a modular, air-transportable floating dry dock for servicing the P6M at a remote site.

Source: Attack From The Sea: A History of the U.S. Navy's Seaplane Striking Force by William F. Trimble, Naval Institute Press, 2005.

Artist's impression of floating dry dock (original image cropped).
 

Attachments

  • seamaster1957dock.jpg
    seamaster1957dock.jpg
    84.2 KB · Views: 205
  • SeaMasterDryDock.JPG
    SeaMasterDryDock.JPG
    46.3 KB · Views: 218

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
876
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Artist's impression of an early proposal to convert a seaplane tender (AV) for servicing and repairing the P6M. Note the long ramp extending from the stern of the ship.

Source: Attack From The Sea: A History of the U.S. Navy's Seaplane Striking Force by William F. Trimble, Naval Institute Press, 2005.
 

Attachments

  • SeaplaneTenderConversion.JPG
    SeaplaneTenderConversion.JPG
    49.3 KB · Views: 223

Abraham Gubler

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,555
Reaction score
259
Triton said:
Note the long ramp extending from the stern of the ship.

That ramp is not fixed, it is carried on the rear of the AV and 'telescopes' out to allow docking of P6Ms. The USS Albermale (AV-5) was actually converted to this configuration.
 

Attachments

  • Albemarle_AV-5_modified.jpg
    Albemarle_AV-5_modified.jpg
    30.3 KB · Views: 210

shockonlip

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
605
Reaction score
10
There is a PILE of Seamaster photos on LIFE magazine's photo archive:
http://images.google.com/hosted/life#utm_campaign=en&utm_source=en-ha-na-us-sk_hosted&utm_medium=ha&utm_term=life%20photo%20archive

key in: Martin Seamaster under "Search LIFE images".

In fact, from this same search panel, key in your favorite aircraft
or aircraft personality name and see what you find.

For example, F-89 is cool, as are others.

Maybe we should have a page that just indicates some of the
more fruitful search arguments.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
876
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com

Attachments

  • martin.xp6m-1.seamaster.138821.jpg
    martin.xp6m-1.seamaster.138821.jpg
    47.8 KB · Views: 148
  • P6M-1_from_below_NAN11-55.jpg
    P6M-1_from_below_NAN11-55.jpg
    39.7 KB · Views: 179
  • Ani_seamaster-Photo.jpg
    Ani_seamaster-Photo.jpg
    428.3 KB · Views: 358
  • martinP6M.jpg
    martinP6M.jpg
    32.5 KB · Views: 357
  • P6M-1s_NAN6-74.jpg
    P6M-1s_NAN6-74.jpg
    109.1 KB · Views: 368

LowObservable

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,214
Reaction score
199
Fascinating project. I once stumped another board for ages by asking them to identify a four-jet low-altitude nuclear bomber tested in the 1950s, excluding the Valiant B.2...

The CONOPS had to be interesting, particularly with the emphasis on mines. But the ability to operate from an unknown location (sheltered harbor, inlet, even a big lake) would have made the force immune to bomber or rocket attack in those pre-satellite recce days. So you'd presumably deploy in a crisis to a presurveyed location, within unrefueled hi-lo-hi radius of Soviet navy bases. Balloon goes up, first wave goes in, penetrates under radar (no AWACS in those days) and mines the exits. Allow 24 hours for minesweeping operations, rinse and repeat.
 

Abraham Gubler

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,555
Reaction score
259
Stargazer2006 said:
:D What a beautiful-looking waste of the taxpayer's money... :-\

Its pointless posts like this that are ruining this board.

The Seamaster was NOT a waste of taxpayers money though it might have been a waste of Vought's money (but in good faith). It was developed to meet an entirely reasonable specification for the US Navy of a survivable basing, long range, strike aircraft based on a long tradition of similar aircraft. That the product did not fully mature is just one of those risks of developing new technology. That the specification did not survive the cost cutting of the budget process is just one of those risks of working for Governments.

Finally; we all know it looks good.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
876
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Vought's money? Don't you mean Glenn L Martin Company? I understand from Wikipedia that after the cancellation of the SeaMaster program, Martin tried to sell the aircraft as a commercial airliner. Does anyone have information about the commercial SeaMaster? Was the SeaMaster the last seaplane or amphibian that was of serious interest to the United States Navy? Does anyone know the reason that the US Navy ambandoned seaplanes and amphibians?
 

Kevin Renner

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
98
Reaction score
7
With all of the runways around the world just why would the USN really need the Seamaster? IMO it's cancellation was case of wiser heads prevailing
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,227
Reaction score
713
Triton said:
I understand from Wikipedia that after the cancellation of the SeaMaster program, Martin tried to sell the aircraft as a commercial airliner. Does anyone have information about the commercial SeaMaster?

Here is what the Glenn L. Martin Museum has to say about planned P6M developments:

Martin engineers and executives tried to generate interest in an eight-jet transport version of the P6M, whimsically dubbed the SeaMistress, a huge nuclear-powered flying boat, and a supersonic seaplane somewhat resembling the Air Force Canberra. But there were no takers. Martin Chairman George Bunker announced that the company was now in the missile and electronics business. Fifty years of aircraft design and production was at an end.

No civil airliner here, only a cargo transport. But then I could be wrong, since there remain quite a few Martin project designations that even the Martin Museum's archivists have not been able to document.

Abraham Gubler said:
Its pointless posts like this that are ruining this board.

I surely wasn't aware that this board was "wasted", until you mentioned it. Sharing an opinion is never a "waste" when there is no attempt to push it and when it is not offensive. This is not an intranet board for professional, this is an internet forum (mind the Latin meaning of that word) where non-professional enthusiasts, some "enlightened", some not, can come and discuss the aircraft they like, not necessarily with the notion that every word they type has got to be 100% useful, relevant and serious, and certainly not on the basis that it will be scrutinized from a professional's point of view.

Abraham Gubler said:
The Seamaster was NOT a waste of taxpayers money though it might have been a waste of Vought's money (but in good faith). It was developed to meet an entirely reasonable specification for the US Navy of a survivable basing, long range, strike aircraft based on a long tradition of similar aircraft. That the product did not fully mature is just one of those risks of developing new technology. That the specification did not survive the cost cutting of the budget process is just one of those risks of working for Governments.

You missed the point of my comment completely. It was a waste because the technology involved was not reused in some later programs as it often happens (in which case it's not a waste, only lessons learned that can be put to better use). The termination of the P6M program not only marked the end of Martin as an aircraft manufacturer, it also marked the end of nuclear-based aircraft projects, the end of flying boats, the end of large dedicated maritime patrol aircraft... So to my mind it WAS a waste of the taxpayer's money, all the more so since none of the aircraft could even be preserved to benefit later generations in a museum!

Abraham Gubler said:
Finally; we all know it looks good.

So because you think everyone agrees on something, there is no need to say anymore, right? Aren't you aware that beauty is subjective and personal by essence (isn't "we all know" a little excessive?). But let's say we follow your logic here: "everyone" knows the Mona Lisa looks good, so there is no need to say "wow" when you look at it? With your logic, it is pointless to marvel again and again at the same things... Let me tell you that there are buildings, paintings or photographs that I can look at regularly and still go "wow" over... and sharing that amazement with others doesn't seem a waste of anybody's time. I think your pragmatism and your quest for 100% efficiency is flawed because it only makes you intolerant towards those who do not see things the way you do.
 
Top