Culver TD2C-1 pilotless drone comes to grief during arrested landing trials in April 1945

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

hw97karbine

Airman 1st Class
248
808
Mar 23, 2025


extended footage



The Culver PQ-14 Cadet is a modified version of the Culver LFA Cadet used as a target drone.

In 1940, the U.S. Army Air Corps drew up a requirement for a radio-controlled target drone for training anti-aircraft artillery gunners. The first aircraft in a series of target drones was a modification of the Culver LFA Cadet which eventually led to the PQ-14 series used throughout World War II and beyond.

Culver proposed a modification of its civilian Model LFA Cadet which the Army purchased as the PQ-8. The success of the PQ-8 led to the development of the "NRD"; a single PQ-8 was converted to the new configuration and tested by the USAAF as the XPQ-14. Larger and faster than the PQ-8, the PQ-14 also had retractable landing gear and fuselage, wings and tail components made of wood with stressed plywood skin.

This prototype was followed by YPQ-14A service test aircraft and 1,348 PQ-14A production models. Of the latter, 1,198 were transferred to the US Navy, which designated them as TD2C-1 with the decidedly unattractive name Turkey.

The XPQ-14 was first flown in 1942 and began to be received in training units shortly after. The aircraft was flown unmanned, controlled by radio, but was flown by a pilot for ferry flights, using a rudimentary control panel installed for that purpose and using their parachutes as a seat. Docile and easy to fly, the aircraft was finished in a bright red target color scheme although operationally, a silver or red finish was applied. Without a pilot they were flown from a "mother ship" aircraft.

The typical mother ship was a Beech C-45. Despite their short lifespan, the aircraft performed well and the Franklin engine was considered "trouble-free". Most of the Culver target aircraft were "blasted out of the sky" by Army anti-aircraft gunners but a dozen or more survived and were surplused after 1950. Flown as a recreational aircraft, their new owners found that the aircraft had a sprightly performance.
 
The PQ-14 was not a modified version of the Culver Cadet. Some ignorant person printed that statement many years ago and it keeps getting quoted. The one piece PQ-14 wing is completely different than the two piece Cadet wing, the fuselage is completely different, and the tail surfaces are completely different. The wood construction methods are similar just as the metal construction methods are similar on a P-51 and P-47. The PQ-8 was basically a Cadet modified with tricycle gear and it was built post-war as the Helton Lark. The PQ-14 used a Franklin O-300 engine with two carburetors with autolean. In the 1950's, my father bought a surplus O-300 and many other PQ-14 parts to use in homebuilding. A friend of his installed an O-300 on a Culver Cadet and cut down the fuselage to install a bubble canopy.
 
I'd suggest besides the inflight engagement of the arresting cable that:
1) the hook was mounted too far forward, guaranteeing a rotation forward upon engagement.
2) it seems like the arresting tension could have been greater than needed.

Besides a few hundred arrested landings, as a kid modeler, I competed in control line AMA Carrier contests and feel it would be a terribly difficult task to gauge a carrier landing if not in the cockpit or at least viewing from the side with lineup set, as with the models.
 
I'd suggest besides the inflight engagement of the arresting cable that:
1) the hook was mounted too far forward, guaranteeing a rotation forward upon engagement.
2) it seems like the arresting tension could have been greater than needed.

Besides a few hundred arrested landings, as a kid modeler, I competed in control line AMA Carrier contests and feel it would be a terribly difficult task to gauge a carrier landing if not in the cockpit or at least viewing from the side with lineup set, as with the models.
A flew C/L carrier and still build carrier models although no longer for contests, just fun.
It is obvious the hook is too far forward.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back