PDA

View Full Version : I love Grumman aircraft



heywooood
06-08-2004, 06:40 PM
The Iron Works ,baby.

What about you? North American? Lockeed?
Republic? or..

Yak? Mikoyan Gureyvich? Ilyushin?

Supermarine? Hawker? Fairey?

Messerschmitt? Fock wulf? Dornier? Heinkel?

Mitsubishi? Kawasaki?

Fiat? Savoia Machetti? Macchi?

I know I have left out a bunch and prolly spelled some of them incorrectly but, meh.

So which Mfg do you think did the best job overall - design - production etc..?

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/3tbm_avenger.jpg
Goin'fishin'

heywooood
06-08-2004, 06:40 PM
The Iron Works ,baby.

What about you? North American? Lockeed?
Republic? or..

Yak? Mikoyan Gureyvich? Ilyushin?

Supermarine? Hawker? Fairey?

Messerschmitt? Fock wulf? Dornier? Heinkel?

Mitsubishi? Kawasaki?

Fiat? Savoia Machetti? Macchi?

I know I have left out a bunch and prolly spelled some of them incorrectly but, meh.

So which Mfg do you think did the best job overall - design - production etc..?

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/3tbm_avenger.jpg
Goin'fishin'

SkyChimp
06-08-2004, 08:38 PM
I've always had a soft-spot for Grumman planes. Maybe because I knew a FM-2 pilot who told me stories, and who was my tangible link to the war in which I'm so interested. Or maybe because that *****y little Wildcat, always the underdog, held the line so well in the early days.

Yep, for me it's Grumman. The Wildcat has always been my favorite.

Regards,
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/halfstaff.gif

StG77_Kondor
06-08-2004, 09:09 PM
You forgot one...Junkers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

-------------------
Stukageschwader 77
"The Fire Brigade!"

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/stg77kondor/pics/NeumullerF-1.jpg
Leutnant Fritz Neumuller
Staffelkapitan 7./StG77 May 1944
610 combat missions
Over 50 Russian tanks destroyed
-----------------------------
http://members.fortunecity.com/stg77/index.htm

Cage50
06-08-2004, 10:02 PM
Well...
For overall, I'd definelty have to go with Grumman. Proven aircraft time & again for various roles, and still a few on the decks.
Of course, as my favorite all time single aircraft, I'd be going with Chance-Vought.
Ah, who am I kidding, if it's got NAVY tagged on it, I'm a fan...lol.

WUAF_Badsight
06-08-2004, 10:07 PM
im 100% sure it was all about the pilots Skychimp , & that they were gald to get something more competitive

as for me im a fan of WW2 A/C

especially the last Prop fighters with their awesome Power & Speed

.
__________________________________________________ __________________________
actual UBI post :
"If their is a good server with wonder woman views but historic planesets...let me know!"
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

VW-IceFire
06-08-2004, 10:43 PM
Hawker...done some amazing things. Hurricane, Typhoon, Tempest...even the Harrier http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

Dammerung
06-09-2004, 12:08 AM
Can't stand Grumman. Its not their fault, but the Navy tried to kill the USAF's F-15 using Grumman's F-14. And I hate the F-14. On the WWII side of things, The Wildcat was incredible. The Punishment it could take, and it's successor could take was ENORMOUS.

Oh, there are no fighter pilots down in hell...
Oh, there are no fighter pilots down in hell...
The whole damn place is full of queers, navigators, and bombadiers...
Oh, there are no fighter pilots down in hell...

LEXX_Luthor
06-09-2004, 01:16 AM
I too always loved German aircraft

necrobaron
06-09-2004, 02:08 AM
Hmmmm. Interesting thread. I'm not really sure what my favorite is, but I guess I'm leaning toward Grumman too.

"Not all who wander are lost."

ucanfly
06-09-2004, 03:21 AM
Gosh I have many favorites thanks to this game: North American, Lockheed, Focke Wolf, Messer, Lavochkin, Yak, Hawker, Curtis, Mitsubishi, Kawasaki, Gloster, Ilushyn, Heinkel, just to name a few. I currently am playing 7 simultaneous campaigns (verrrrry slowly).

Can't wait for Grumman and Chance Vought though, especially when exercising their tailhooks. The great thing about these games is the variety and learning how to play to a particular plane's strengths.

JarheadEd
06-09-2004, 05:52 AM
Douglas rocks,...SBD, A-20, A-26, AD-1.
BUT,...I have a serious case of infidelity with Chance Vought http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://img13.photobucket.com/albums/v37/JarheadEd/p40.jpg

BlitzPig_DDT
06-09-2004, 07:06 AM
Grumman pwnz0rz Chance-Vaught.

Actually, come to think of it, it just pwnz0rz in general. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://operationcarepackage.org/ddtsig.gif

MEGILE
06-09-2004, 07:26 AM
Republic, because they gave us the ever so graceful "Jug" http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://www.2and2.net/Uploads/Images/p51dark.bmp

Freycinet
06-09-2004, 08:07 AM
Definitely Lockheed, when it comes to US firms. They always represented grace and technical prowess compared to the barrel-like, clumsy Grumman planes for instance. Race cars compared to pick-up trucks. Pick-ups might be more practical, but they haven't really got the panache and star potential of those full-breds.

Then again, it wasn't only good looks that did it for the P-38's over the Pacific. I'm sure many pilots were happy to have two engines over the big sea as well...

The inimitable Kelly Johnson was of course the main reason for Lockheed being at the forefront. So many great designs since WWII and they all pushed the envelope.

Compared to the p-38, the Grumman series of fighters just represent a rather boring progression of a tried and tested design, Wildcat, Hellcat, Bearcat...

FooFTR
06-09-2004, 08:32 AM
Grumman baby!!! I think the most advanced
version of the P-38 would'nt have a chance in a furball with the "Pickup like" Bearcat. hehe

How many fork tailed wonders (P-38s) do you
see flying against Rare Bear at Reno air Races?
zippo... zilch... none..

Take that..

FooFTR

gombal40
06-09-2004, 08:50 AM
Fokker
http://www.leosk.org/SCT/fokker/Fokker_10.jpg
http://www.pegasusmodels.com/d23a.jpg http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Dash_C.
06-09-2004, 09:20 AM
Ooh, that D.XXI is looking good!

But I'll go with Messerschmitt/Bayerische Flugzeugwerke. The planes look so cool.

gombal40
06-09-2004, 10:06 AM
And it in olegs hand or so im told http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
any ai but its a start.

Tater-SW-
06-09-2004, 11:16 AM
Grumman. Ah.

If I could own 1 ww2 warbird, I'm not sure if it would be a F4F/FM-2, or a PBY. So consolodated is on my list as well (spent a lot of time with a ww2 B-24 driver as well---many times on his porch watching PB4Y, P-2, P-3, and A-26 slurry bombers heading off to a fire someplace (his house was under aproach for runway 17 here in Albuquerque)).

tater

VF-17_Jolly
06-09-2004, 03:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SkyChimp:
I've always had a soft-spot for Grumman planes. Maybe because I knew a FM-2 pilot who told me stories, and who was my tangible link to the war in which I'm so interested. Or maybe because that *****y little Wildcat, always the underdog, held the line so well in the early days.

Yep, for me it's Grumman. The Wildcat has always been my favorite.

_Regards,_ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don`t know if this has been raised but does anyone know if we will get F4F`s and FM-2`S

S~

http://www.skyknights.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/jolly.jpg

VF-17_Jolly
06-09-2004, 03:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FooFTR:
Grumman baby!!! I think the most advanced
version of the P-38 would'nt have a chance in a furball with the "Pickup like" Bearcat. hehe

How many fork tailed wonders (P-38s) do you
see flying against Rare Bear at Reno air Races?
zippo... zilch... none..
Take that..

FooFTR<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Totaly agree.

Here`s a quote from US Navy Fighters of WWII

"Satan`s Kittens (VF-19) broke in the Fleet`s first F8F-1s and proceeded to humiliate Army fighter pilots along the West Coast on a regular basis.
In one fabled episode,the skipper (VF-19) was challenged by the commanding officer of a nearby P-38 squadron.
The bet: in a section takeoff, the Bearcat had to gain enough altitude for an overhead gunnery pass at the Lightning before the P-38 raised its wheels.Lieutenant Commander Joe Smith actually completed a second overhead before the Army pilot tucked his gear in the wells!...Money changed hands....." http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.skyknights.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/jolly.jpg

[This message was edited by VF-17_JOLLY on Wed June 09 2004 at 03:39 PM.]

Rebel_Yell_21
06-09-2004, 04:25 PM
Boeing baby.

As to the F8F - P38 flap, I love the F8F and dearly hope to see it in PF down the road, but you can't compare the two at takeoff. F8F = purpose built interceptor, P-38 = long range fighter bomber. I have read about that confrontation, and it is funny, but it means nothing.

http://www.303rdbga.com/art-ferris-fortress-S.jpg

Gibbage1
06-09-2004, 05:16 PM
White Lightnin was at Reno and there were other P-38's at Reno. They did very well! Its just they are too expensive to race anymore.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VF-17_JOLLY:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FooFTR:
Grumman baby!!! I think the most advanced
version of the P-38 would'nt have a chance in a furball with the "Pickup like" Bearcat. hehe

How many fork tailed wonders (P-38s) do you
see flying against Rare Bear at Reno air Races?
zippo... zilch... none..
Take that..

FooFTR<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Totaly agree.

Here`s a quote from US Navy Fighters of WWII

"Satan`s Kittens (VF-19) broke in the Fleet`s first F8F-1s and proceeded to humiliate Army fighter pilots along the West Coast on a regular basis.
In one fabled episode,the skipper (VF-19) was challenged by the commanding officer of a nearby P-38 squadron.
The bet: in a section takeoff, the Bearcat had to gain enough altitude for an overhead gunnery pass at the Lightning before the P-38 raised its wheels.Lieutenant Commander Joe Smith actually completed a second overhead before the Army pilot tucked his gear in the wells!...Money changed hands....." http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.skyknights.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/jolly.jpg

[This message was edited by VF-17_JOLLY on Wed June 09 2004 at 03:39 PM.]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Most P-39's were sent to the Russians - so I guess that was an American secret weapon against our Russian allies."

Stan Wood, P-38 pilot who also flew the P-39.

heywooood
06-09-2004, 05:38 PM
Again - you have to think of these fighter planes in context. There are catagories within the catagory of 'fighter plane'.

I love Grumman for many reasons - primarily the kiss principle... they OWN it.

Make a fighter plane based on what fighter pilots tell you - take that info and try to do everything they want better than they want it.
Design build test in record time!
Develope insane production methods and build at an incredulous rate!
And overbuild your airframes to provide max protection for the most valuable asset a combat plane has - the pilot.
And look at their longevity and their record in the air! Have you ever seen a more beautiful plane than the F14 Tomcat

I love all the major players from all nations thanks to 1c - that really needs to be said because I had never really appreciated the Russian planes before and now think about this...The US built an amazing air armada here in the states without having to do what the Russians had to do. Their country was overrun and they were having to move factories and equipment and machiery and people and build on the run!! All of their war materiel was produced under the worst conditions and at times in the middle of COMBAT ! WOW.

My American hat is off to those people and their descendants forever.

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/3tbm_avenger.jpg
Goin'fishin'

Gunner_361st
06-09-2004, 05:57 PM
Well said, Heywooood. Credit given where credit is due. It is hard to think about all those who died on the Eastern front, on both sides.

Major Gunner of the 361st vFG

http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1087.jpg

heywooood
06-09-2004, 06:55 PM
Yes - on all sides, Gunner.

Can you imagine the Grumman factory or the North American plant workers having to keep machine guns and rifles nearby and dealing with work stoppages to repel enemy troops intent on capturing and destroying everything? Could we have maintained production under that kind of duress? What a test.

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/3tbm_avenger.jpg
Goin'fishin'

WUAF_Badsight
06-09-2004, 10:59 PM
58 soviet citizens were killed for every US soldier that also was killed

the ETO ...... it was the slaughter feilds of WW2

.
__________________________________________________ __________________________
actual UBI post :
"If their is a good server with wonder woman views but historic planesets...let me know!"
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Stuntie_2
06-10-2004, 02:44 AM
I love the tubby little Wildcat - the fighter that broke the back of the Japanese.

Hellcats and Corsairs get the glory but it was the Wildcat that fought the cream of the Japanese in the early years despite being totally outmatched performance wise by the Zero.

Besides it's short, fat and cuddly - just like me http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Cheers
Stuntie.

Giganoni
06-10-2004, 03:06 AM
My hat goes off to Incom for making the wonderful Z-95 headhunter. Why its tough armor plating got me thr...wait a minute..where am I again? Okay, being part Italian, I have a soft spot for Japanese planes. Because I like meatballs. Besides stars, or bars, or both was like, so 60 years ago. No seriously, I like Japanese planes..and Fiat.

http://img74.photobucket.com/albums/v225/giganoni/IL2/giganoni2.jpg

michapma
06-10-2004, 07:20 AM
I will mention Bell because I fell in love with the Airacobra in IL-2.

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned Northrop for the P-61. I just love double-propped fighters, am having a bit of a fling with the P-38 at the moment in anticipation of the Pacific. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I picked up a lot more respect for Grumman fighters after reading Sakai's Samurai!.

Mike

http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap/fileadmin/Image_Archive/badges/69giap_badge_chap.jpg (http://giap.webhop.info)

The ongoing IL-2 User's Guide (http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~chapman/il2guide/) | Forgotten Skies (http://www.forgottenskies.com/)
But we are all that way: when we know a thing we have only scorn for other people who don't happen to know it. - Mark Twain, Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc

Udidtoo
06-10-2004, 07:49 AM
Owning FB has given me am appreciation for aircraft from many nations that were just odd names to pronounce before.

...........but since we are choosing here. I feel like I've had a love affair with Lockheed and the P-38.

Then one day I'm reading the general discussion, minding my own business when I see this pretty lil thing called a Hellcat.........in my heart I have sinned and I just don't care, she's so..so mmmm mmmmmm that navy blue, that tail hook.

..............................
I always have just enough fuel to arrive at the scene of my crash.

jpatrick62
06-10-2004, 11:23 AM
Hawker - I love the Typhoon, the penultimate doodlebug chaser.
Grumman - The tubby Wildcat held its own until the Corsair and Hellcat took over.
North American - Look the look and high alt performance of the 'stang.
Supermarine - Spitfire - need I say more? The fighter that best the Me109.
Vought - Corsair - Beauty and the beast. The best roller of WW2.
Grumman (again) Hellcat - Simple, rugged, and deadly.
Focke-Wulf - FW190 - the poster child for Energy fighters which proved TnB was dead.

sugaki
06-10-2004, 11:55 AM
I think all Grumman's are aesthetically uglier than Japanese planes--they're all tubby and have fat lines.

That being said though, I think Grumman made the best fighter planes in the war. Survivability, ruggedness, and ease to fly were staple principles of Grumman, and it helped to turn around the war. Though Wildcats were outmatched by the Zero, they still were able to hold their own with proper tactics--and plus, Grumman had an ultra quick response to the strengths of the Zero and churned out the F6F, which dominated over the Zero. F8F was probably the best prop-driven fighter, combining maneuverability, speed, and forgiving controls.

BlitzPig_DDT
06-10-2004, 12:30 PM
Sug, you're right about the qualities in terms of fighting, but I think you got the wrong forum, this isn't "No-Taste Anonymous". http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

http://operationcarepackage.org/ddtsig.gif

Freycinet
06-10-2004, 12:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FooFTR:
Grumman baby!!! I think the most advanced
version of the P-38 would'nt have a chance in a furball with the "Pickup like" Bearcat. hehe

How many fork tailed wonders (P-38s) do you
see flying against Rare Bear at Reno air Races?
zippo... zilch... none..

Take that..
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK man, I'll take that for what it is.. a match-up COMPLETELY ignorant of history! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

You should compare the P-38 to the WILDCAT! - THOSE TWO are the contemporary planes.

- Now see which plane 0wns the other!

P-38 was a thoroughbred on par with the best fighters produced in Europe in the same years (late 30's)... - The Wildcat was hopelessly outclassed.

A couple of quotes:

-----------

"Johnson and his team conceived this twin-engine, single-pilot fighter airplane in 1936 and the Army Air Corps authorized the firm to build it in June 1937. Lockheed finished constructing the prototype XP-38 and delivered it to the Air Corps on New Year's Day, 1939"

-------------

"In 1936, the US Navy published a requirement for a carrier-based fighter, While the Navy first selected the Brewster F2A Buffalo, it authorized Leroy Grumman's Bethpage, Long Island company to build one prototype, the XF4F-2, as an alternative. Experienced builders of carrier planes, the Grumman designers planned the Wildcat for the challenging take-offs and landings on small, heaving carrier decks. With large wings, situated well forward on the fuselage, the plane had very high lift, permitted quick take-offs, slow landings, and excellent maneuverability. But high lift resulted in slower speed, which could only be improved with a more powerful engine.
Grumman test pilot Robert Hall first flew the XF4F-2 in September, 1937. Powered by a Pratt & Whitney R-1830-66 Twin Wasp, rated at 1,050 horsepower, it achieved 290 miles per hour in test flight. The XF4F-2 featured a cantilever wing set midway up the fuselage, all-metal construction, semi-monocoque construction, mill-riveted skin, four .50 caliber machine guns, and main wheels that retracted into the fuselage. Despite the F4F's speedy performance in a 1938 fly-off at Anacostia, the Navy went with the Brewster.

"On its own hook," Grumman improved the design further with the next prototype, the XF4F-3. The "dash Three" had the more powerful R-1830-76 P&W, larger wings, a better machine gun installation, and (ultimately) a higher-mounted tailplane. With a top speed of 335 MPH, it impressed the Navy, and 78 F4F-3 aircraft were ordered in August, 1939."

--------------

BSS_Vidar
06-10-2004, 02:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dammerung:
Can't stand Grumman. Its not their fault, but the Navy tried to kill the USAF's F-15 using Grumman's F-14.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Where on Gods Green Earth did you get that idea?
The F-15 was strictly developed to counter the arrival of the MiG-25 Foxbat in the Soviet inventory.
The F-14 was strictly developed as a stand-off weapon with the Pheonix missile for fleet defence. The two couldn't be more further appart.
Their may have been a passing thought to use the AIM-54 to counter the Foxbat threat, but that was it! As passing thought. The AIM-54 Pheonix was derived from the AIM-47 that would have been carried by the YF-12/SR-71, hence the name it got tagged with... "Pheonix, a mythical bird of fire reborne from the ashes of another."

Back to the tread...

Grumman and Lockheed.
over 2000 hrs in Lockheed S-3 Vikings
over 15 hrs in Grumman F-14 Tomcats
over 7 hrs in McDonnel/Douglas F/A-18 Hornets

Man, I miss thoes days http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

BSS_Vidar

[This message was edited by BSS_Vidar on Thu June 10 2004 at 01:56 PM.]

CaptJodan
06-10-2004, 05:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Giganoni:
My hat goes off to Incom for making the wonderful Z-95 headhunter. Why its tough armor plating got me thr...wait a minute..where am I again?

http://img74.photobucket.com/albums/v225/giganoni/IL2/giganoni2.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Z-95 has horrible armor! But it was Incom's Wildcat to their later developed Hellcat, the X-Wing.

Definately wrong forum.

I'd have to go with the 38, ergo Lockheed. It's really close between many of the canidates during WWII, though. For me in modern times, it's undeniably Lockheed. They've just built all the coolest things. Back then, Boeing built the B-17, which is a love, North American the 'stang, Northrop the P-61 (another wonderful twin), and also the A-26.

But was it Grumman who built the Tigercat? I know it was limited in production and such, but still another awesome twin.

jensenpark
06-13-2004, 11:58 AM
Grumman for the Wildcat. So tubby and ugly yet simply beautiful.

Hawker for the Hurricane and the SeaFury

http://www.corsair-web.com/thistler/rtfoxint.jpg
Buzz Beurling flying his last sortie over Malta, Oct.24, 1942

Ruy Horta
06-13-2004, 12:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rebel_Yell_21:
F8F = purpose built interceptor, P-38 = long range fighter bomber.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually the P-38 was designed to be an interceptor, not a long range fighter-bomber, although its range and twin engine arrangement made it a good fighter(-bomber) for the PTO.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif
Ruy Horta

Rebel_Yell_21
06-13-2004, 03:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by rhorta:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rebel_Yell_21:
F8F = purpose built interceptor, P-38 = long range fighter bomber.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually the P-38 was designed to be an interceptor, not a long range fighter-bomber, although its range and twin engine arrangement made it a good fighter(-bomber) for the PTO.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif
Ruy Horta
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The XP-38 certainly was designed to be an interceptor, but that wasn't what was on the runway next to that F8F, now was it? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

http://www.303rdbga.com/art-ferris-fortress-S.jpg

sugaki
06-14-2004, 02:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
Sug, you're right about the qualities in terms of fighting, but I think you got the wrong forum, this isn't "No-Taste Anonymous". http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

http://operationcarepackage.org/ddtsig.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hahaha, well, like how those planes look or not, you gotta admit they were all tubby. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif F6Fs been growing on me though, but more cus' it's such a versatile and reliable crate. Bearcat's one of the coolest late prop planes though. Would've been interesting to see it plow through planes.

Ruy Horta
06-14-2004, 03:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rebel_Yell_21:
The XP-38 certainly was designed to be an interceptor, but that wasn't what was on the runway next to that F8F, now was it?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rolling eyes or not, the original statement was about purpose built and the P-38 was not originally intended to be a (long range) fighter-bomber.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif
Ruy Horta

Rebel_Yell_21
06-14-2004, 04:25 PM
Since you seem to be having a hard time with this, maybe you would like to read what I said again, which was "F8F = purpose built interceptor, P-38 = long range fighter bomber".

In other words, at no point did I say or intimate that the P-38 on that runway was a purpose built long range fighter bomber. I said it was a long range fighter bomber. So, its takeoff run versus the lightweight, high powered purpose built interceptor (F8F) would mean nothing. Thats it. If you want to pick nits, find a nit to pick.

http://www.303rdbga.com/art-ferris-fortress-S.jpg

heywooood
06-14-2004, 07:13 PM
personally - I love Grumman most for this...
http://www.mucheswarbirds.com/F3F2.jpg

and this..
http://gallery02.kitparade.com/images/f3f2rf_title.jpg

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/3tbm_avenger.jpg
Goin'fishin'

heywooood
06-14-2004, 07:50 PM
can you believe - with the retirement of the
F-14 Tomcats this year - there will be no Grumman fighters on American carrier decks for the first time since....carriers were viable.
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/f-14_clean.bmp

unbelieveable.

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/3tbm_avenger.jpg
Goin'fishin'

VW-IceFire
06-15-2004, 08:23 AM
They are retiring the F-14? Wow...I'm outa the loop. I know the Super Hornet has been deployed but that was quick.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

BlitzPig_DDT
06-15-2004, 11:01 AM
Seems Grumman has gotten out of the plane buisness and into IT too. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

http://operationcarepackage.org/ddtsig.gif

Red_Storm
06-15-2004, 01:59 PM
Focke-Wulf and Fokker.

http://www.albumsnaps.com/viewPhoto.php?id=43885

---
http://www.albumsnaps.com/viewPhoto.php?id=42993

VF-17_Jolly
06-15-2004, 02:06 PM
Grumman are a member of the team that are developing the JSF(XF-35) although a Lockheed Martin product Grumman are still in there.... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://www.skyknights.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/jolly.jpg

SkyChimp
06-15-2004, 05:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by heywooood:
can you believe - with the retirement of the
F-14 Tomcats this year - there will be no Grumman fighters on American carrier decks for the first time since....carriers were viable.
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/f-14_clean.bmp

unbelieveable.

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/3tbm_avenger.jpg
Goin'fishin'<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


No, there will just be Grumman carriers.

That's who make our carriers now, Northrop-Grumman, in Newport News, Virginia.

Half my family works there:

http://www.nn.northropgrumman.com/photogallery/Facilities/C03-367-5.jpg

They also build submarines.



Regards,
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/halfstaff.gif

ElAurens
06-15-2004, 05:33 PM
If it's not Boeing, I'm not going...

http://www.daveswarbirds.com/usplanes/photos/b-314.jpg
_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/avatars/Curtiss_logo.gif

BlitzPig_EL

heywooood
06-15-2004, 05:38 PM
Skychimp? - are you telling me that THIS is somewhere in the works at Grumman?
http://vttbots.com/Graphics/flying_sub_effects_2.jpg

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/3tbm_avenger.jpg
Goin'fishin'

RAC_Pips
06-15-2004, 05:43 PM
Phew thats a relief!! Grumman and the USN are synonymous. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://img73.photobucket.com/albums/v221/PipsPriller/F6F_macwhorter.jpg

jensenpark
06-15-2004, 07:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SkyChimp:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by heywooood:
can you believe - with the retirement of the
F-14 Tomcats this year - there will be no Grumman fighters on American carrier decks for the first time since....carriers were viable.
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/f-14_clean.bmp

unbelieveable.

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/3tbm_avenger.jpg
Goin'fishin'<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


No, there will just be Grumman carriers.

That's who make our carriers now, Northrop-Grumman, in Newport News, Virginia.

Half my family works there:

http://www.nn.northropgrumman.com/photogallery/Facilities/C03-367-5.jpg

They also build submarines.



_Regards,_
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/halfstaff.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There was a great show on TV the other night (one of those 'monster machine' shows) that showed what appeared to be a floating drydock from Grumman...where it would take a ship into it's own drydock...out in the water...pretty cool.

I want one for Father's Day.

http://www.corsair-web.com/thistler/rtfoxint.jpg
Buzz Beurling flying his last sortie over Malta, Oct.24, 1942

BM357_Raven
06-15-2004, 09:06 PM
I'm about as grum as they come...

grum

\Grum\, a. [Cf. Dan. grum furious, Sw. grym, AS. gram, and E. grim, and grumble. [root]35.] 1. Morose; severe of countenance; sour; surly; glum; grim. [``Raven was grum man.'']....

2. Low; deep in the throat; guttural; rumbling; as,....[``Raven's engine really grums.'']....

verbatum (almost): dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=grum)

Blazing Magnums 357th VFG
bm357.com (http://www.bm357.com/NEW_BM357/flash_intro.html) | Roster (http://bm357.com/NEW_BM357/bm357_rosters.asp) | Flash Cartoon (http://bm357.com/NEW_BM357/raven_in_plane9p.html) | BroDawg (http://www.bm357.com/NEW_BM357/flash-intro/tinman3.html) | QuickTime Video (http://www.bm357.com/NEW_BM357/Downloads_Public/bm357_transmission.zip)
Blazing_Magnums Server (http://bm357.com/NEW_BM357/server.htm)

http://bm357.com/bm357_goofy_ubi.jpg (http://bm357.com)http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

My mamma's Harley is bigger than your mamma..

BigKahuna_GS
06-16-2004, 04:57 AM
S!

__________________________________________________ ______________________
FooFTR --Grumman baby!!! I think the most advanced
version of the P-38 would'nt have a chance in a furball with the "Pickup like" Bearcat. hehe

How many fork tailed wonders (P-38s) do you
see flying against Rare Bear at Reno air Races?
zippo... zilch... none..
__________________________________________________ ______________________

Saw "Rare Bear" in person years ago. Every part on those racers are precison engineered and wind tunnel tested for max speed---extremely exspensive. The Formula 1 of the aircraft world.

The only other planes I remember in this catagory are the Super-Corsair, P51 and a mean looking Sea Fury. Other planes have been tried but have proved too exspensive--such as, White Lightning P-38.

I think some BF109s were tried out many years ago but had some airframe problems holding up to the stress of racing and the idea was dropped.

__

Grumman built a great line of tough birds. I especially like the F8F Bearcat--pure muscle machine to lightweight airframe and the Tigercat. Too bad these planes werent is service sooner. I think the Tigercat would of made a very impressive strike/fleet defense aircraft, carrying torpedos, HVARS, napalm etc.

I wonder how much research was devoted towards aerial refueling during WW2 by the Navy ?

The TBF would have made a great tanker and aerial refueling would of put most the fleet out of range from Japanese strike aircraft.

Anybody have some insight on this?


_____

CCJ: What do you define as the most important things a fighter pilot must know to be successful, relating to air combat maneuvering?

Robert S. Johnson :
It's pretty simple, really. Know the absolute limits of your plane's capabilities.
Know its strengths and weaknesses. Know the strengths and weaknesses of you enemy's fighters. Never fight the way your enemy fights best. Always fight the way you fight best. Never be predictable.

In "Fighter Aces," aviation historians Raymond Tolliver
and Trevor Constable compared Johnson's record with that of two German aces.
Werner Molders was the first ace to score 100 aerial victories and Erich Hartmann is the top scoring ace of all time with 352.

The authors noted that
Johnson "emerges impressively from this comparison." He downed 28 planes in 91 sorties, while Molders took 142 sorties to do the same, and Hartmann, 194.
________


http://www.warplaneswarehouse.com/planes_lg/MS1AOO_LG.jpg

"Angels of Okinawa"

huggy87
06-16-2004, 08:23 AM
Yikes!

I sure wouldn't want to aerial refuel with a big centerline prop out in front of me. I don't think it can be done. Did the skyraiders ever tank?

BM357_Raven
06-16-2004, 06:55 PM
http://www.mucheswarbirds.com/F3F2.jpg

Yeah Heywooood,

I dig that plane too. Not sure why though...? Cuz it's funky?

Not to be disrespectful to the Wildcat enthusiats, but ever since CFS2's description of the Wildcat (as sugaki mentioned) as a "tubby" little plane (anyone have the correct wording?), I've kinda looked at it like it was...well... tubby...

Not that I know exactly what that means. But, if someone were to point at me and say "hey, raven lookin' kinda tubby.." I'd develop a complex...Probably even stay home more... Lose out on dates... Eat and drink more... Sit in front of the computer... Type about it.. That kinda thing...

But, I wanna take a moment to talk seriously to you cats about a conspiracy theory I've been developing...

Ever notice how sometimes in certain pictures the Hellcat looks really, really hell-fire cool, but in others it looks kinda "tubby" ?

I think it was part of a WWII Japanese plot to make the Hellcat (and American planes in general) look "tubby."

And as we all know... Anything tubby can't hurt you right? Never heard of the "tubby monster" or a "tubby doomsday weapon" or a "deadly tubby Pacific fighter!"

Think you get my point; CONSPIRACY!

Some have suggested THE CONSPIRACY might even be within.. But I dont think the Corsair enthusasiast need to diminish the Hellcat to make their plane look any cooler.. But if you notice, there are a couple paintings where the Conspirators even manage to make the Corsair look Tubby... WTH?

Blazing Magnums 357th VFG
bm357.com (http://www.bm357.com/NEW_BM357/flash_intro.html) | Roster (http://bm357.com/NEW_BM357/bm357_rosters.asp) | Flash Cartoon (http://bm357.com/NEW_BM357/raven_in_plane9p.html) | BroDawg (http://www.bm357.com/NEW_BM357/flash-intro/tinman3.html) | QuickTime Video (http://www.bm357.com/NEW_BM357/Downloads_Public/bm357_transmission.zip)
Blazing_Magnums Server (http://bm357.com/NEW_BM357/server.htm)

http://bm357.com/bm357_goofy_ubi.jpg (http://bm357.com)http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

My mamma's Harley is bigger than your mamma..

Zyzbot
06-16-2004, 08:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by huggy87:
Yikes!

I sure wouldn't want to aerial refuel with a big centerline prop out in front of me. I don't think it can be done. Did the skyraiders ever tank?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://home.hawaii.rr.com/echo1946/mamer/images/RefuelPlanes.jpg

huggy87
06-17-2004, 09:07 AM
Well, that is one way to refuel. Thanks for the pic. Not very conducive to carrier ops or refueling fighters. I don't know how you would stick the extra guy in the back of ahellcat to grab the hose.

BSS_Vidar
06-17-2004, 11:38 PM
Transition to the "Super Bug's" started just under two years ago. F/A-18C squadrons will be getting the F/A-18E while the majority of the Tomcat squadrons started transitioning to the F/A-18F. "E's" will be primarlity Fighter/Intercept and "F's" will be strike/fighter. There are a few exceptions to the rule though. This all started shortly after I retired. I'm glad too, I hate seein' the ol' "Turkey" go. She was my favorate jet ever since I was a kid when Final Countdown came out. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
Two Tomcats saved my bacon back in Jan '89. Two Lybian MiG-23's launched out of Bengasi with the intent to blast my trusty S-3B Viking into ablivion. Splash 2 for the VF-32 Swardsmen aka "The Gypsies".

BSS_Vidar

heywooood
06-18-2004, 12:13 AM
Vidar - I cant tell you how much all this 'consolidation' is bugging me... I like diversity and competition where warplanes are concerned. Not this idea of having one plane that can be an air superiority fighter/all weather strike/stealthy/stol/thrust vectoring/cashcow. It is a mistake and like with the emperors new clothes, no one is saying so.
The argument about the cost savings in spare parts / weapons and engines / and mechanical training being cheaper with one airframe to manage instead of three or four is manure. You end up with one jet that doesnt do any of these jobs as well as it should...a jack of all trades, but a master of none. And with a price tag for which you could have two or three purpose built jets for specific roles.
I read somwhere that the new Hornets - while plush inside with all new avionics etc.. couldnt keep up with an F14 - the Tom was carrying external tanks and the Hornet was clean...and the Tomcat still walked away easily.

And as far as range?... the new Hornet has half the legs of the F14. Maybe soon the only role manned jet pilots will have will be overseeing ucavs so it really doesn't matter anyways - who knows.

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/3tbm_avenger.jpg
Goin'fishin'

BSS_Vidar
06-18-2004, 11:04 AM
I couldn't agree with you more. Tomcats have been the fastest thing on the flightdeck every since the days of the F-4 and A-5 Viggy. The Super Bug is also taking the last task of the S-3B Viking too. Hoovers will be phased out of all CAGS by the end of FY 2007. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif Vikings haven't had ASW gear in them since late 1998. Super Bugs are being fitted with "Buddystores" to carry on the S-3's mission of Mission/Recovery tankers. Also, the F/A-18G or E/A-18 (or whatever http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif) will be taking the mission of the E/A-6B Proweler by 2010.

Hornets, Hawkeye's, and Helo's, Now thats a niffty airwing. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif

BSS_Vidar

sugaki
06-18-2004, 12:10 PM
For the navy, cost-saving was something that simply had to be done. The end of the cold war, as well as less money funded by the Clinton administration meant the "Super Bug" getting precedence over any modernized versions of a Tomcat. By the time Gruman submitted proposals for a modernized Tomcat in the 90s, the Navy already accepted the proposal for the Super Hornet, and didn't have enough cash to throw around to support the Tomcat.

Also, the Navy sees bombing roles as more important than air-superiority--hence the nickname Bombcat for the F-14. With that, they don't see the necessity of having a huge range and fast speed.

The Super Bug's more reliable, more modernized, and cheaper to maintain--important factors in the penny pinching for the Post-Cold War US.

huggy87
06-18-2004, 10:35 PM
Ahh, don't be such a stick in the mud Vidar. Hornets, Hawkeye's and helos will be a fine airwing. But I'll miss the reassuring look of Viking hawking me at 1.5K. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Heywood, the hornet beats the tomcat in so many flight regimes that not only is it a question of economics but also of the superior capabilities the hornet offers. You are right about the tomcat having excellent speed and accelleration. For the B and D models at least. But that really doesn't play an overly important role. You are wrong about the Rhino only having half the legs of a tomcat. They are about on par.

In the BVR realm the F-18 will win every time. If the fight goes to the merge the hornet is superior as well. The tomcat is not a bad dogfighting machine, but the hornet has superior 1C and 2C fighting ability. The radar and cockpit ergonomics are much better in the hornet. Not to mention what the amraam brings to the fight. The tomcats can't carry these.

For visual bombing the hornet has unbeatable accuracy.

I will give the Tomcat credit for being a better LGB striker, but that is due mainly to the Lantirn pod. The ATFLIR

Harm, Mavericks, Rockets, JSOW, Slam-ER, Harpoon. Check. The hornet can carry them all. The tomcat can't carry any of them.

It is about time for the tomcat to go. Other than being fast, a decent striker, and looking cool, there really is not anything that a hornet can't do better than the tom. As far as tanking, the super has about the same give as an S3 and it can perform more missions. As for the growler, how effective that will be remains to be seen.

SkyChimp
06-19-2004, 10:37 AM
I hear Boeing beat out Lockheed to build the next generation anti-submarine aircraft for the Navy. I understand Boeing will be building the F/A-18 SuperHornet as well.

Looks like Boeing is reestablishing itself as a super-power in Naval aviation, a position it hasn't held, IMO, since the '30s.

I understand the Boeing anti-submarine (and more) plane will be a custom-built 737. Northrop-Grumman is a partner.

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/mma/mmaback.html

http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/Fotos/boeingmi/737MMA.JPG

Vidar, have you ever been stationed in Hamtpon Roads?

Regards,
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/hellsig.jpg

[This message was edited by SkyChimp on Sat June 19 2004 at 10:10 AM.]

BSS_Vidar
06-19-2004, 12:26 PM
Boeing bought McDonnel/Douglas, that's why. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
When I did a stint of ships company in '84-85 on the Nimitz, we were in the yards at Portsmouth, just up the river from Hampton Roads.
The P-7 is going to be a B-737, yes indeedy. P-3's are being takin' out of service faster than they thought. There has been some nasty corrosion issues as of late.

Hey Huggy,
I don't think Hornets are all that bad http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif After all I bagged quite a few hours in them over at VFA-106 when they were still at NAS Cecil Field, and also out at Strike U in Fallon.(My old OpsO transfered there and hooked me up when we did our CAG stint out there). Ah, http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif I can still here the lawn darts calling us... ("Vidar's have any give?" http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/cry.gif) Yeah that's where I got my name. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif VS-22 Checkmates radio callsign is "The Vidars". Before I joined the Blacksheep it was Vidar_710... after the jet I punched out of off the cat on JFK in Oct '89.

BSS_Vidar

[This message was edited by BSS_Vidar on Sat June 19 2004 at 11:35 AM.]

huggy87
06-19-2004, 12:47 PM
Yeah, I've gotten my share of the "liquid love" from the Vs-24 scouties in my old airwing. Now I'm the one passing it in a rhino. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Holy ****! You punched out on the cat. Was that in a S-3. What happened. Did everyone make it OK?

BSS_Vidar
06-19-2004, 12:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by huggy87:
For visual bombing the hornet has unbeatable accuracy.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Out in Fallon The Checkmates (VS-22) won the CVW-3 Bombing Durby with a "Booger on the windscreen" bomb site. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Three Hornet squadrons (2 Navy VFA-37/105,one Marine VMFA-312) and, one Tomcat (VF-32) we beatin' out by a WarHoover. At the award cerimony over at Strike U, the CAG was moritified, and kepth the festivities VERY short... What a hoot that was! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif I'll never forget it.

BSS_Vidar

[This message was edited by BSS_Vidar on Mon June 21 2004 at 08:36 AM.]

huggy87
06-19-2004, 12:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BSS_Vidar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by huggy87:
For visual bombing the hornet has unbeatable accuracy.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Out in Fallon The Checkmates (VS-22)won the CVW-3 Bombing Durby with a "Burger on the windscreen" bomb site. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Three Hornet squadrons (2 Navy VFA-37/105,one Marine VMFA-312) and, one Tomcat (VF-32) we beatin' out by a WarHoover. At the award cerimony CAG was moritifies, and kepth the festivities VERY short... What a hoot that was! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif I'll never forget it.

BSS_Vidar<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/cry.gif Must have been a sad, sad, day for the pointy nose's. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

BSS_Vidar
06-19-2004, 12:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by huggy87:
Holy ****! You punched out on the cat. Was that in a S-3. What happened. Did everyone make it OK?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes it was an S-3B, Lateral hardover off the cat during the clearing turn. I was the only survivor.

BSS_Vidar