Thoughts about the F7F Tigercat.

[Rufus123]

It seems to me that when the Tigercat would finally get carrier qualified on what I assume would be the Midway Class carriers that the F designation would be obsolete for this plane.

With the Bearcat acting as a fast climbing interceptor, Corsair acting as the fighter, the Tigercat seems to me to be a torpedo/attack plane that can fight if it has to rather than a pure fighter. Any thoughts on this?

 

[Conslaw]

I think the Navy would have taken cues from the British use of the Mosquito, as a true multi-role aircraft. Of course, there are differences. The Mosquito had two crew members, and the Tigercat only had one. The Tigercat was faster, but the Mossie had a longer range. I think the main reason the F7F wasn't put into combat before the war was over was that the Navy really didn't NEED it. Any role the F7F could either be handled by 1 or 2 F6F or F4Us or a TBM.

 

[N4521U]

It sure is pritty tho.

 

[davebender]

F7F would have been a fine aircraft if it had entered service three years earlier (i.e. mid 1942). Historically it entered service just in time to be made obsolete by jets.

 

[GregP]

The F7F was pure fighter. All other uses were afterthoughts. The performance was amazing and it still flies a great aerobatic sequence at airshows. The Two seaters were night fighters and all other uses were well after being designed as a fighter. Many people feel it was easily one of the best of the pistons to fly. Especially former fighter pilots who flew it.

There never was an F7F fitted as a torpedo carrier unless it just isn't well documented. There were 34 F7F-1's as single-seat fighters, 1 F7F-1N fitted with radar as a prototype night fighter, 1 XF7F-2N prototype, 65 F7FN 2-seat night fighters, a small number of F7F-2D drone conversions, 189 single-seat F7F-3 fighter-bombers, 60 F7F-2N 2-seat night fighters, a small number of F7F-3E electronics warfare conversions, a small number of F7F-3P photo recon conversions, and 13 F7F-4N night fighters. Total 364. None were torpedo planes.

We are in the process of restoring one now at Fighter Rebuilders. It is looking very good.

 

[Aaron Brooks Wolters]

I am envious GregP. You need to post some photos of that bird it you are able.

 

[GregP]

I can take some pics Tuesday ... I'm off tomorrow and prefer not to go in. My volunteer day is Saturday, so today and tomorrow are the only days I'll NOT be there this week. Tomorrow I'm going to Joe Yancey's Allison shop for a cookout on Labor Day.

 

[pattle]

The Tigercat (not that I know a lot about it) has always sounded to me like an excellent aircraft that wasn't needed, which is a slightly unusual situation as there have been plenty of aircraft that were needed for things but were useless.

 

[GregP]

It was a very good fighter with four 20 mm cannons on the centerline.

Flies VERY on two fans well but is a bit directionally challenged on one engine unless you are ... delicate with the good-engine throttle.

All of the F7F's still flying beat book numbers for speed and climb. Many still have all the military equipment in them, including inert rounds and gun muzzles and gun ports, so they are essentially in stock aerodynamic form.

 

[Rufus123]

The F7F was pure fighter. All other uses were afterthoughts. The performance was amazing and it still flies a great aerobatic sequence at airshows. The Two seaters were night fighters and all other uses were well after being designed as a fighter. Many people feel it was easily one of the best of the pistons to fly. Especially former fighter pilots who flew it.

There never was an F7F fitted as a torpedo carrier unless it just isn't well documented. There were 34 F7F-1's as single-seat fighters, 1 F7F-1N fitted with radar as a prototype night fighter, 1 XF7F-2N prototype, 65 F7FN 2-seat night fighters, a small number of F7F-2D drone conversions, 189 single-seat F7F-3 fighter-bombers, 60 F7F-2N 2-seat night fighters, a small number of F7F-3E electronics warfare conversions, a small number of F7F-3P photo recon conversions, and 13 F7F-4N night fighters. Total 364. None were torpedo planes.

We are in the process of restoring one now at Fighter Rebuilders. It is looking very good.

Is this info incorrect? I do know everything in print is not always fact.

F7F Tigercat fighter - bomber (1944) - Carrier Planes - Naval Aviation - United States Of America - Naval aviation and armaments - Navypedia

It shows only one version that was not able to mount a torpedo. It shows 364 that were built were torpedo capable.

They were building them as the war came to an end and were shipping them to the Pacific then the war ended so they intended to use them at least as a land based plane.

Even though designed as a fighter here is what it looks like to me it brings to the table.

TBM- If the information about them is correct here is something that is more survivable than the TBM and is a force multiplier as it can do jobs the TBM cannot. It can out strafe the TBM, can be a fighter, was well as do what a TBM can do.

Bearcat- The Bearcat would be a better interceptor I would think. The Bearcat would take a back seat as an attack aircraft. The Tigercat can out strafe the Bearcat, can out bomb the Bearcat, though it is not as good of an interceptor it can help in that role.

Corsair- I think can outfight the Tigercat but the Tigercat could sure supplement it and with 4 20mm and 4 .50's has the firepower to deliver. The Corsair can also bomb. If the Tigercat as published can deliver a torpedo and can out strafe the Corsair.

I think the Tigercat beats the Hellcat at all roles except for deck space.

Since they were starting to deploy them how were they intended to be used?

 

[Rufus123]

F7F-1 fighter-bomber 4/1944 - 1945 2 Pratt Whitney R-2800-22W engines (2 х 2100 h. p.), 1 seat, 4 20-mm guns, 4 12.7-mm MG, 908 kg of combat load (1 454-kg bombs or 1 298-mm rocket or 1 Mk13 torpedo)

F7F-2N night fighter-bomber 10/1944 - 3/1945 2 seats (or additional fuel tank instead of radar operator seat at day), 4 20-mm guns, 4 12.7-mm MG (at day), 1818 kg of combat load (2 227-kg bombs or 8 127-mm rockets or 2 298-mm rockets on wings, 1 454-kg bomb or 1 298-mm rocket or 1 Mk13 torpedo on hull), APS-6 radar

F7F-3 fighter-bomber 3/1945 - 6/1946 1 seat, 2 R-2800-34W engines (2 х 2100 h. p.), 4 20-mm guns, 4 12.7-mm MG, 1818 kg of combat load (2 454-kg bombs or 8 127-mm rockets or 2 298-mm rockets on wings, 1 907-kg bomb or 1 298-mm rocket or 1 Mk13 torpedo on hull), without radar

F7F-3N night fighter-bomber 5/1945 - 6/1946 2 seats, 4 20-mm guns, 1818 kg of combat load (2 454-kg bombs or 8 127-mm rockets or 2 298-mm rockets on wings, 1 907-kg bomb or 1 298-mm rocket or 1 Mk13 torpedo on hull), SCR-720 radar

F7F-3P recon 3/1945 - 8/1945 61 1956 1 seat, 4 20-mm guns, 4 12.7-mm MG, 908 kg of combat load (2 454-kg bombs or 8 127-mm rockets or 2 298-mm rockets on wings), photo camera, without radar

F7F-4N night fighter-bomber 9/1946 - 11/1946 12 1954 2 seat, 4 20-mm guns, 1818 kg of combat load (2 454-kg bombs or 8 127-mm rockets or 2 298-mm rockets on wings, 1 907-kg bomb or 1 298-mm rocket or 1 Mk13 torpedo on hull), APS-19 radar

I could be missing something but from the looks of this it looks like to me it would have made an amazing attack plane and scary torpedo plane. After it drops its bombs or torpedo it could continue on as a fighter. It would have been harder to intercept on it's way home and could take down some planes as well.

 

[GregP]

The F7F Tigercat COULD carry one torpedo, but the US Navy didn't operate them as torpedo bombers. They were operated as fighters, fighter/bombers, interdiction, and night fighters. In Korea, they performed fighter and night interdiction missions in their only combat use ... no torpedo attacks.

The F7F-3 was produced in day fighter, nigh fighter, and photo-recon versions. All retained the ability to carry a torpedo but rarely if ever did.

Since they were not operated as torpedo bombers, they are fighters that had the capability ... but it wasn't ever used. In my book, that removes them from the torpedo plane category altogether. To be classified as torpedo plane, the type should at LEAST have been operated as such by somebody. You can use an F-22 Raptor as a ground attack plane, but nobody does, so it isn't one. I think we all know that planes can be adapted for special uses in times of need. The Mosquito and Ju-88 come immediately to mind.

 

[Capt. Vick]

From what I have read about the two seat version used during night attacks in Korea, the number of back seaters that got out of stricken Tiger cats was nil or pretty near that. Ouch!

 

[Rufus123]

The F7F Tigercat COULD carry one torpedo, but the US Navy didn't operate them as torpedo bombers. They were operated as fighters, fighter/bombers, interdiction, and night fighters. In Korea, they performed fighter and night interdiction missions in their only combat use ... no torpedo attacks.

The F7F-3 was produced in day fighter, nigh fighter, and photo-recon versions. All retained the ability to carry a torpedo but rarely if ever did.

Since they were not operated as torpedo bombers, they are fighters that had the capability ... but it wasn't ever used. In my book, that removes them from the torpedo plane category altogether. To be classified as torpedo plane, the type should at LEAST have been operated as such by somebody. You can use an F-22 Raptor as a ground attack plane, but nobody does, so it isn't one. I think we all know that planes can be adapted for special uses in times of need. The Mosquito and Ju-88 come immediately to mind.

During the Korean war there was not many ships to go after. I was thinking in terms of how they would have been used in WW2, they just didn't it in time and saw no action.

I understand they were being shipped to the Pacific when the war ended. Kind of like the Bearcat was stating to be shipped at wars end.

 

[Rufus123]

The F7F Tigercat COULD carry one torpedo, but the US Navy didn't operate them as torpedo bombers. They were operated as fighters, fighter/bombers, interdiction, and night fighters. In Korea, they performed fighter and night interdiction missions in their only combat use ... no torpedo attacks.

The F7F-3 was produced in day fighter, nigh fighter, and photo-recon versions. All retained the ability to carry a torpedo but rarely if ever did.

Since they were not operated as torpedo bombers, they are fighters that had the capability ... but it wasn't ever used. In my book, that removes them from the torpedo plane category altogether. To be classified as torpedo plane, the type should at LEAST have been operated as such by somebody. You can use an F-22 Raptor as a ground attack plane, but nobody does, so it isn't one. I think we all know that planes can be adapted for special uses in times of need. The Mosquito and Ju-88 come immediately to mind.

During the Korean war there was not many ships to go after. I was thinking in terms of how they would have been used in WW2, they just didn't it in time and saw no action.

I understand they were being shipped to the Pacific when the war ended. Kind of like the Bearcat was stating to be shipped at wars end.

Most of my mothers family was lost when the North took Seoul.

 

[GregP]

Sorry to hear about your loss.

War knows no mercy. Many innocents are simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

[Ivan1GFP]

All of the F7F's still flying beat book numbers for speed and climb. Many still have all the military equipment in them, including inert rounds and gun muzzles and gun ports, so they are essentially in stock aerodynamic form.

This is perhaps a silly question, but who is flying a modern F7F at war emergency power at 25,000 feet to test maximum level speed?

- Ivan.

 

[Conslaw]

This is perhaps a silly question, but who is flying a modern F7F at war emergency power at 25,000 feet to test maximum level speed?

- Ivan.

People that have $2 million to buy and restore an F7F do a lot of things that most of the rest of us would not do.

 

[GregP]

Well, Mr. Rod Lewis owns TWO Tigercats and races them at Reno ... and goes pretty darned fast. Ask the people he beats! He KNOWS what the boopk says for the Remo altitude and KNOWS what his do there.

One of them flew an outstanding aerobatic demo at a recent Planes of Fame airshow with Steve Hinton at the controls.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFFP_ku_E8c

Here are some shots of the one we have in restoration. Here is a temporary assembly of the tail section to check fit.

Here is looking into the port wheel well.

Here is a QEC package.

Here is looking down into the nose section. The fuselage front half is on a rotisserie.

More to come.

 

[Rufus123]

Sorry to hear about your loss.

War knows no mercy. Many innocents are simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

It was not as much of a loss for me as I was not born yet. You could say I was a indirect product of the Korean war.

My mothers family at the time lived on Mt Namsan, overlooking Seoul. My mother was a linguist at the time for the Seoul government and moved with several government officials that though someone who spoke seven languages was a asset. The rest of the family was in Seoul and her brothers, and cousins chose to fight in defense of the city and most of the family didn't survive. I would not be born for many years later. My mother during the occupation worked at a translator for the government and somehow I came about because of this. I am in the states now and don't have any known living relatives.

I do wonder if stories kids are told are partly wishful thinking. It is confirmed that almost all of the family was killed when Seoul was lost but how could my mother know they were defending the city and not executed while she was being moved around from safe location to safe location by the government.

South Korea was lost and it was Americans that got it back, others helped in small ways but this was an American operation. People sometimes say MacArthur saved Korea, I don't know if things would have been different if another person was in charge or not. Things would have failed with out the Americans. Old Korean's know what happened, the younger generation forgets how close Korea came to being lost.