Interesting progeny, if you will, thanks for this. SBD was a favorite of a lot of pilots. Dad carrier-qualed on it. This is cool to see. Appreciate your getting it together like this for us (...especially me, lol).Neither was the SBD if we take things a bit too far
Northrop BT-1
View attachment 629202
Northrop XBT-1
View attachment 629203
Northrop XBT-2
Northrop "merged/was bought out" by Douglas and the plane was redesignated the SBD.
Favourite Naval Fighter
- Thread starter VA5124
- Start date
glennasher
Senior Airman
And, of course, the T-6/SNJs, amongst others.
Greg Boeser
1st Lieutenant
Lockheed B-34 / PV-1
Admiral Beez
Major
No love for the Dewoitine D.373/6? The world's first single-seat carrier fighter with monoplane folding wings.
Dewoitine beat Grumman to this innovation by several years, to the point that France had to settle for non-folding F4Fs as their intended replacement for the D.373/6.
Dewoitine beat Grumman to this innovation by several years, to the point that France had to settle for non-folding F4Fs as their intended replacement for the D.373/6.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Better one Wildcat than two Dewoitine 373/6!
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I really don't know if that's true but I'm bored.
Admiral Beez
Major
Agreed, but it's interesting that Grumman was so behind the times. The French carrier fighter was folding in the 1930s, as were the RN's two twin seat fighter (Skua and Fulmar) by 1940, even the folding reticent IJN had wing tip folds on their Zeros from its beginning in 1940.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Grumman wasn't behind the times, there simply wasn't a call for folding wings in the BuAer specs. until the USN needed to increase the aircraft number aboard ship.
Add to that, typical folding wing configurations in use were all patented and required licensing.
Grumman's innovative "Sto-wing" design (introduced in '41) bypassed other designs and became an industry standard.
In the case of the IJN, very few of their aircraft had folding wings and the ones that did, only had folding wingtips in order to clear the elevator - the Aichi M6A being the exception.
Add to that, typical folding wing configurations in use were all patented and required licensing.
Grumman's innovative "Sto-wing" design (introduced in '41) bypassed other designs and became an industry standard.
In the case of the IJN, very few of their aircraft had folding wings and the ones that did, only had folding wingtips in order to clear the elevator - the Aichi M6A being the exception.
Hardlydank
Airman 1st Class
My favorite from WW2 is Zero or Hellcat. Postwar favorite is the F-8 Crusader because it's just cool and because of Area 88
Admiral Beez
Major
Really? For starters, does the US really have to care about foreign patents? Grumman had one customer in mind, the USN. But a simple vertical fold like on most non-Grumman carrier aircraft can't possibly be patentable, everyone was doing it. If Grumman had wanted folding wings from the onset there were simpler options, as well they knew.
Thumpalumpacus
Colonel
Perhaps Grumman cared about foreign patents if the company envisioned overseas sales?
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Handly-Page made a fortune from licensing their leading-edge slat to other aircraft manufacturers, btw.
Admiral Beez
Major
Perhaps that was Grumman's game, hoping that other manufacturers would license their STO-Wing on their own designs? But only the Wildcat, Hellcat and TBF Avenger used it, with Grumman abandoning it for the Bearcat, Tigercat, etc. Do the Grumman E-2 Hawkeye and C-2 Greyhound use it today?
Was tho STO-Wing design substantially different than the backward fold of the Fulmar?
Last edited:
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The sto-wing design was unique in that it used a pivot at the wing-root that enables the wings to rotate and fold back similar to that of a bird.
Traditional folding wings to that point saw wings simply folding upward, however, in some carriers, the folded wings are too tall to be stowed belowdecks.
By the way, the sto-wing design was still being used on naval aircraft designs as late as the Vietnam war.
Traditional folding wings to that point saw wings simply folding upward, however, in some carriers, the folded wings are too tall to be stowed belowdecks.
By the way, the sto-wing design was still being used on naval aircraft designs as late as the Vietnam war.
Admiral Beez
Major
It was a thing of beauty to watch as well. Meanwhile look how many chaps are needed to fold a Seafire.
Peter Gunn
Master Sergeant
Yes.
Admiral Beez
Major
Can you define the "traditional" period? Up to the late 1930s very few carrier aircraft folded their wings upwards, but instead folding wings went backwards, sometimes rotating to vertical as they went backwards, like this Skua, or just straight back like this US Navy Curtiss SOC-1 Seagull.
Until the Seafire Mk.III entered service in 1942 every folding FAA aircraft folded its wings backwards. There were the pre-war Douglas TBD, Nakajima B5N and Vought SB2U with upward folding wings, but
GrauGeist do three examples make a tradition?
Last edited:
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
The Blackburn Skua wings folded back with the wing leading edge up. A bit like a Sto wing but the leading edge on Sto wing points down. Blackburn Sharks had hydraulic locks on the backwards folding wings.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Gahhhh...
A whole section of my post disappeared
The missing part covered the traditional cinvention to fold back, folding up was limited to hangar height and I had pointed out that the Ju87T had a configuration closest to the sto-wing.
Sorry about that - trying to compose any lengthy replies with this GD phone is a soul-sucking endeavour: typos, auto-correct and effing-up paragraphs when I try to move the screen up (the keyboard blocks all but a third of the screen) makesnfor a trying time...
A whole section of my post disappeared
The missing part covered the traditional cinvention to fold back, folding up was limited to hangar height and I had pointed out that the Ju87T had a configuration closest to the sto-wing.
Sorry about that - trying to compose any lengthy replies with this GD phone is a soul-sucking endeavour: typos, auto-correct and effing-up paragraphs when I try to move the screen up (the keyboard blocks all but a third of the screen) makesnfor a trying time...
cammerjeff
Tech Sergeant
I had never considered the Dewoitine D.373! It is a looker, I don't think I knew about the Naval version, just the Land based D.371. A couple of shots of a D.376 with its wings folded. Interesting fold system, I would love to see the design of the strut pivot points!
From Dewoitine D.376 C.1 : Dewoitine
From Dewoitine D.376 C.1 : Dewoitine
