Why did the US Navy Blue Angels start with Hellcats?
- Thread starter gjs238
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
My guess would be availability and it was an easier aircraft to fly.
Token
Senior Airman
They only flew the F6F for one year, then transitioned to the F8F.
Although the F4U turned out to be an outstanding aircraft the F6F seems to have been a preferred aircraft by a lot of the pilots of the day. Most of the ones I have talked to that flew both said the F6F was more predictable, stable, and docile, but still capable of excellent performance. And the F6F certainly accumulated more flight hours and kills than the F4U. With all of that said I can see that if the pilots who formed the first flight of three were given their choice of aircraft they may have gone with the F6F, especially if they knew it was short term, and they would shift to something higher performance in the near future.
T!
Although the F4U turned out to be an outstanding aircraft the F6F seems to have been a preferred aircraft by a lot of the pilots of the day. Most of the ones I have talked to that flew both said the F6F was more predictable, stable, and docile, but still capable of excellent performance. And the F6F certainly accumulated more flight hours and kills than the F4U. With all of that said I can see that if the pilots who formed the first flight of three were given their choice of aircraft they may have gone with the F6F, especially if they knew it was short term, and they would shift to something higher performance in the near future.
T!
Glider
Captain
I admit this is only a guess but on a practical level the better visibility from the cockpit may well have been a factor. When undertaking close formation aerobatics the ability to see what is going on around you is all important. With its significant blind spot under the nose and the position of the cockpit towards the rear of the wing, visibility would almost certainly be less in the Corsair.
With its cockpit more or less in the middle of the wing and the sloping nose the Hellcat would have better all round vision.
With its cockpit more or less in the middle of the wing and the sloping nose the Hellcat would have better all round vision.
Good point, Glider. This is just based on hearsay from the former Navy and Marine fighter pilots in my Dad's club, but I think the F6F was a better "fly," too, particularly in tight formation. That's not to say the F4U, even as "recessed" from the nose as that cockpit was, wasn't a crack acrobat. It was responsive, and could keep up with anything, from the stories I heard. This was known from just the drilling. When the pilots were off, they were encouraged to check-out in their aircraft, to remain sharp. While it may not have been an official policy, they pushed those aircraft to the limits in those drills. They knew what they could do better than anybody.
As an aside, in a story I related earlier in another thread, an F4U in Kaneohe made an emergency landing at the Navy base, there, with telephone wires wrapped around a wing, and the Hawaiian police hot on his tail. The daredevil pilot tried to go under telephone pole wires up on one of the mountain roads. Almost made it.
As an aside, in a story I related earlier in another thread, an F4U in Kaneohe made an emergency landing at the Navy base, there, with telephone wires wrapped around a wing, and the Hawaiian police hot on his tail. The daredevil pilot tried to go under telephone pole wires up on one of the mountain roads. Almost made it.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Keep in mind that the F6F was also at the end of it's service by war's end, being replaced by the F8F, so in a sense, it was "expendable".
Even though the F6F served with the Blue Angels less than 6 months, it still would have been far easier to convince the "Brass" to commit an end of service aircraft to the new program than it would a new type.
Once the Blue Angels proved themselves, the F8F would not have been such a hard sell for the Navy to commit them to the program.
Even though the F6F served with the Blue Angels less than 6 months, it still would have been far easier to convince the "Brass" to commit an end of service aircraft to the new program than it would a new type.
Once the Blue Angels proved themselves, the F8F would not have been such a hard sell for the Navy to commit them to the program.
Sat in the cockpit of a Corsair once. On the ground, in a hangar, downright claustrophobic. The idea of taxiing and taking off in that beast, never mind low altitude formation acrobatics, was terrifying, the visibility was so limited. Local airport manager in my childhood days had been a production test pilot for Chance Vought in War ll, and he said it was a clunky handler on the ground but a great flier. He also said control harmony deteriorated at less than combat speeds, making carrier landings challenging. (As if the lousy forward visibility wasn't enough challenge!) That's why they gave the first ones to the Marines for island ops. But they sure could carry a load. And catch a Zero. And make it home even with pieces missing. The Hellcat was the Navy's Mustang; the Corsair was itsitsp Thunderbolt.
Ah gosh, but can you strike that last sentence. Many F6s came back looking like Hell. They could take it, too. In fact, they could take more punishment than the F8, I'll say. Can we call the F8 the P-51? I'm just not comfortable with that on the F6. And that P-51 isn't coming back home after getting hit like some of the F6s did.
I agree the F6F was a tough bird, but so was the P-51 if you didn't hit the coolant system. I don't see either of them as being in the Corsair/Thunderbolt class when it comes to battle damage. The F8F doesn't count; it was of the post-war generation. But what do we know? We weren't there so all we have is opinions based on what we've read, the photos we've seen, the statistics we've studied, and the stories we've heard from those who WERE there. IMHO a battle-damaged F6F that's pushed over the side due to uneconomical repair, or comes apart in the arresting gear (as they occasionally did) is not the equivalent of an equally damaged Corsair or Thunderbolt that gets patched up and returned to combat. IAC, let's hear it for MR. PRATT and MR. WHITNEY! R2800 - My nomination for THE engine of the war.
Thorlifter
Captain
A strong contender for sure. But I think Mr. Merlin might have something to say about that. Not to mention Heir Daimler-Benz
Bring 'em on!
Herr Daimler: Inventive fellow, but he lost the war.
Mr. Merlin: Sweet-sounding, powerful, and elegant, but fragile!
R2800 would never win a singing contest against a Rolls or a Daimler, but she'd get you home shot to pieces, which is better than the others would do.
I can't say for sure, but if I were to make a guess, I would say the following would account for it
Cost: The F4U was around 85,000 dollars a pop, the F6F started around 50,000-55,000 a plane, then reduced to around 30,000 as production rates ramped up
Handling: It was more docile, easier to master, and had a tighter rate of turn. It's roll-rate could have been better, but it evidently wasn't all that big a deal breaker
Cost: The F4U was around 85,000 dollars a pop, the F6F started around 50,000-55,000 a plane, then reduced to around 30,000 as production rates ramped up
Handling: It was more docile, easier to master, and had a tighter rate of turn. It's roll-rate could have been better, but it evidently wasn't all that big a deal breaker
fubar57
General
The man chosen to form, train and lead the original Blue Angels was Lt. Cmdr. Roy M. "Butch" Voris, a 7 victory ace. His aircraft was the Hellcat so this may have been part of the reason
BINGO! Safer, too.
Last edited:
Don't let Darren know I posted that.
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
