Douglas SBD Dauntless upgrade/replacement

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by gjs238, Dec 15, 2011.

  1. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    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.
     
  2. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,990
    Likes Received:
    435
    Trophy Points:
    83
    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.
     
  3. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    All the SBD needs is a more powerful engine.
     
  4. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,199
    Likes Received:
    784
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    It was done - it was called a "Skyraider."

    [​IMG]
     
  5. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    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.
     
  6. RCAFson

    RCAFson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,389
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Hey, that's easy! The USN could replace both the TBF and SB2C with license built Fairey Barracudas.
     
  7. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,199
    Likes Received:
    784
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    #7 FLYBOYJ, Dec 15, 2011
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2011
    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.
     
  8. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    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.
     
  9. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,199
    Likes Received:
    784
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    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! :eeeeek:
     
  10. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Devastating to whom???
     
  11. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    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.)
     
  12. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,199
    Likes Received:
    784
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    Those flying it. It was about 25 mph slower than the Barracuda
     
  13. RCAFson

    RCAFson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,389
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48

    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.
     
  14. RCAFson

    RCAFson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,389
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    double post.
     
  15. pbfoot

    pbfoot Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,636
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    niagara falls
    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
     
  16. RCAFson

    RCAFson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,389
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    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.
     
  17. Juha

    Juha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    3,734
    Likes Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Helsinki
    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
     
  18. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,199
    Likes Received:
    784
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    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.
     
  19. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,199
    Likes Received:
    784
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    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
     
  20. RCAFson

    RCAFson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,389
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    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.
     
Loading...

Share This Page