Douglas SBD Dauntless upgrade/replacement

[gjs238]

You have the opportunity to use hindsight to upgrade or replace the Douglas SBD Dauntless.
This is your opportunity to achieve an outcome superior to the Curtiss SB2C Helldiver.

 

[tomo pauk]

Something along with Grumman Avenger with dive brakes seem like non-problematic solution. Another proposal could be Vultee Vengence, with bigger wings (400 sq ft?), 2 wing HMGs, 1 back.

 

[davebender]

All the SBD needs is a more powerful engine.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

You have the opportunity to use hindsight to upgrade or replace the Douglas SBD Dauntless.
This is your opportunity to achieve an outcome superior to the Curtiss SB2C Helldiver.

It was done - it was called a "Skyraider."

 

[davebender]

A fabulous attack aircraft but it's a long way off. Until then I think the SBD can get the job done provided it has an engine producing more then 1,200 hp.

 

[RCAFson]

You have the opportunity to use hindsight to upgrade or replace the Douglas SBD Dauntless.
This is your opportunity to achieve an outcome superior to the Curtiss SB2C Helldiver.

Hey, that's easy! The USN could replace both the TBF and SB2C with license built Fairey Barracudas.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

A fabulous attack aircraft but it's a long way off. Until then I think the SBD can get the job done provided it has an engine producing more then 1,200 hp.

Actually it wasn't far off...

The Skyraider was to be a succesor to the SBD and was originated designated and named XBT2D-1 Dauntless II. It would have had a bombing and torpedo capability combining VT and VS squadrons. Even before the Skyraider was on the drawing board, Douglas was looking to manufacture an aircraft that would replace both the Dauntless and Heldiver with the XSB2D-1 Destroyer. The aircraft was ordered and later canceled as the war ended. It also had a remote controlled turret. The aircraft eventually morphed into the Skyraider.

The Destroyer flew in 1943, the Skyraider in 1945, not really that far off....

The SBD served well with or without the 1,200 Wright and the 1,000 HP engine birds eventually faded away as the war progressed, replaced with the -5. Basically this is a case of a seemingly obsolete aircraft that served well regardless of its limitations.

 

[gjs238]

I wonder if a crew of 2 or 3 makes for an aircraft too heavy and slow.
Perhaps a crew of 1, more like the A-36.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Hey, that's easy! The USN could replace both the TBF and SB2C with license built Fairey Barracudas.

If only they could be operated without glycol!

With a max speed of about 230 and some of the operational problems the aircraft had, I almost would rather fly a Devestator!

 

[gjs238]

Devastating to whom???

 

[gjs238]

The A-36 was a derivative of the P-51.
I wonder if other fighters could have made the switch as well?
F4U, F6F? (Remember though, talking about making a real dive bomber, not a fighter bomber.)

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Devastating to whom???

Those flying it. It was about 25 mph slower than the Barracuda

 

[RCAFson]

If only they could be operated without glycol!

With a max speed of about 230 and some of the operational problems the aircraft had, I almost would rather fly a Devestator!

Except the Barracuda could carry a torpedo that actually worked, and they weren't that slow:

Trials of the Mk 1 at Boscombe Down in October 1941 showed a weight of 12,820 lb (5,830 kg) when equipped with 1,566 lb (712 kg) torpedo; at this weight the Mk 1 showed a maximum speed of 251 mph (405 km/h) at 10,900 ft
Fairey Barracuda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Barra mk2 was also encumbered with ASV and other gear, which the USN wouldn't need for daylight attacks.

The Mk2 entered RN service about 6 months prior to the SB2C entering USN service (IIRC), and this could probably have been sped up with a US decision to built the Barracuda in mid 1941.

 

[RCAFson]

double post.

 

[pbfoot]

Hey, that's easy! The USN could replace both the TBF and SB2C with license built Fairey Barracudas.

Geez thats a very sick idea. Why in the world would you opt for that thing I know you have a penchant for Brit Aircraft and your name suggests RCAF but what was the last Brit aircraft used my guess is the Bristol Freighter. Do you think there is a reason for that

 

[RCAFson]

Geez thats a very sick idea. Why in the world would you opt for that thing I know you have a penchant for Brit Aircraft and your name suggests RCAF but what was the last Brit aircraft used my guess is the Bristol Freighter. Do you think there is a reason for that

The Barracuda had it's share of problems, but so did the Sb2C, and it was still a very competent dive bomber and an excellent torpedo bomber.

 

[Juha]

There were SBD with more powerful engine, that was SBD-6 with 1350hp engine. I cannot remember for sure but I think it was still considered to be too slow and too short-legged by Navy top brass. Controversially at Marianas IIRC more SB2C-1s ran out of fuel than SBD-5s

No Barracudas, please. It was underpowered beast with some bad habits.

Juha

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The Barracuda had it's share of problems, but so did the Sb2C, and it was still a very competent dive bomber and an excellent torpedo bomber.

The SB2C had many problems, you still can't compare it to the Barracuda. In hindsite the need was seen for a replacement fro both SBD and SB2C and the answer was the Skyraider.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Except the Barracuda could carry a torpedo that actually worked, and they weren't that slow:

Trials of the Mk 1 at Boscombe Down in October 1941 showed a weight of 12,820 lb (5,830 kg) when equipped with 1,566 lb (712 kg) torpedo; at this weight the Mk 1 showed a maximum speed of 251 mph (405 km/h) at 10,900 ft
Fairey Barracuda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Barra mk2 was also encumbered with ASV and other gear, which the USN wouldn't need for daylight attacks.

The Mk2 entered RN service about 6 months prior to the SB2C entering USN service (IIRC), and this could probably have been sped up with a US decision to built the Barracuda in mid 1941.

And the Mk 2 had a speed under 230 mph. Even at 251, it wan't dropping the torpedo at that speed. The torpedo issue has NOTHING to do with the aircraft.

Performance
Maximum speed: 228 mph (198 kn, 367 km/h) at 1,750 ft (533 m)
Cruise speed: 195 mph (170 kn, 314 km/h) at 5,000 ft (1,524 m)
Range: 686 mi (597 nmi, 1,104 km) with 1,620 lb (736 kg) torpedo
Service ceiling: 16,600 ft (5,080 m)
Wing loading: 32.6 lb/ft² (159 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.12 hp/lb (0.20 kW/kg)
Climb to 5,000 ft (1,524 m): 6 min

from your same source...Fairey Barracuda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[RCAFson]

The SB2C had many problems, you still can't compare it to the Barracuda. In hindsite the need was seen for a replacement fro both SBD and SB2C and the answer was the Skyraider.

The Skyraider didn't even fly till March 1945. It wasn't really an option to replace the SBD. The only other naval, carrier rated, dive bomber available in the needed time frame was the Barracuda II.