Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
It's a shame the Curtiss SC Seahawk showed up so late.
The two seat SC-2 may have been a candidate.
While it had either fixed gear or a float, it may have been possible to have retracting main gear designed in.
It did have folding wings, too.
<snip>
The F6 was already a crack dive-bomber right out of the box. That's where the B in VBF comes from. The way many are accustomed to thinking of these one would think they were in VF squadrons. Those were the F4Us. The F6 didn't need a second seat because it could take care of itself. The SBDs were the ones that needed to run from the carrier fighter CAP. You look at the training logs in these F6s and you'll see all the bombing runs they did. Still, instead of thinking of them as bomber-fighters, which they were, many still conceive of them as just fighters.The small TBU certainly has an appeal.
How about something like the Hell-bomber (tm)? A Hellcat lookalike, with a bomb bay under the level of the wings. It already has Fowler flaps so the low-speed abilities will be fine. Fuel tanks go in the wings (as much as Grumman does not like the idea). Should be a speedy attacker even with an 1-stage R-2800.
Another suggestion might be the 2-seat Corsair, with the bomb panier/bomb bay under the fusleage. Relocate the intercoolers and oil cooler under the engine a-la Hellcat if needed, so more fuel can be packed inside.
All the dive bombers carried two 500lb bombs or a single 1000lb bomb or assorted smaller. The 1600lb AP didn't show up until after Midway although it was development earlier. In time for the 1939 issue of specification?It needs to have a bomb bay of at least same size like it was the case with the new-gen attackers for the USN.
Wright R-2600 with 1700hp, about 661 built by March 1942, many thousands later. Late war SB2Cs got 1900hp engines.Powered by the engines that US industry can provide in good numbers,
Curtiss SB2C could just about do it, carrying 1000lbs bombs and 330 US gallons.Range of at least 1000 miles with the full bomb bay and internal fuel,
Now things get dicey. An extra 200 gallons (1200lbs) for take-off?and 1500 with drop tanks added.
See above and also see catapult capacity.Obviously, fully carrier capable, even with big take off weights
And now we are asking for around 10-16% more speed (give or take) over the 3 two seat dive bombers that were built.Max speed of at least 320 mph bombed-up & clean,
F6F held 250 gal internal, An SB2C carried 330 gals internal.The F6 was already a crack dive-bomber right out of the box.
The Torpedo bomber/s had a bigger bomb bay.
Now things get dicey. An extra 200 gallons (1200lbs) for take-off?
And now we are asking for around 10-16% more speed (give or take) over the 3 two seat dive bombers that were built.
But the chances of getting a faster airplane with a bigger bomb bay and using the same engines are pretty small.
Torpedo was supposed to be carried by SBC2 already by, at least, January 1943, so no change here.
No, to "fit" the torpedo into the SB2C required removing the bomb bay doors or fastening them open. tilting the torpedo so that while the tail was inside the bomb bay the nose of torpedo hung down. Speed and range takes a hit.Bomb bay is the same as on the SB2C. Engines can be better, and with a better installation.
Not sure you want to use Fowler flaps on a dive bomber?We can also note that none of the big boys attackers (TBF, SB2C, TBU, SB2A) was outfitted with Fowler flaps.
Thank you, I stand corrected.No, to "fit" the torpedo into the SB2C required removing the bomb bay doors or fastening them open. tilting the torpedo so that while the tail was inside the bomb bay the nose of torpedo hung down. Speed and range takes a hit.
Not sure you want to use Fowler flaps on a dive bomber?
The US dive bombers used perforated flaps top and bottom for dive brakes, you may not get the lift you are looking for with perforated surfaces.
Unless you use a time machine you don't get the better cowls/exhaust in production in early 1942.
I would also note that the R-2800 with 2000hp for take off only has about 1600hp at 13,000ft vs the R-2600 B series (1700hp at T-O) having 1450hp at 12,000ft and max continuous
is 1450hp at 13,000ft vs 1350hp at 13,000ft (both engines running at 2400rpm).
Performance at altitude is not proportional to the take-off power.