Check out Ikarus Art here → ikarusart.net/ and use the code REX to get 10% off your order. F.A.Q Section Q: Do you take aircraft requests? A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:) Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others? A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both. Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos? A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :) Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators? A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible
This may require a separate video, but could you cover the advantages/disadvantages between all metal verses wood frame aircraft since, at least in the run up to and during the early stages of WW2 those would have been legitimate design considerations.
The Bessler steam plane, it was from the 1930s, so from a period when planes were proper things, it could be used for landing on short runways as the engine was instantly reversable in flight.
My father was a naval aviator who began his flying career in '42. During WWII, the flew the F4F, the F6F, the F4U and managed to even get some stick time in on SBDs. After the war, his first command (this was about '47) was an SB2C squadron out of NAS Glynco, GA. He said that as challenging as the F4U was (they called it the "Ensign Eliminator"), the Big Tailed Beast scared the hell out of him. The initial variants had an electrical problem and sometimes the wing-mounted ordinance wouldn't drop from the pylons when toggled, the end result being that the wings would snap off when a pilot pulled out of a dive. Nice........
F4U was impossible to land on a carrier until Eric Brown (Royal Fleet Air Arm) came in with a left turn and landed easily. Eventually even the USN accepted that this was actually a superb aircraft and really no harder to land than any other aircraft of the day.
My old college girlfriend's dad was a Helldiver pilot. Earned the Navy Cross in the First Battle of the Philippine Sea 20 June 1944 as Commanding Officer of Bombing Squadron 2 (VB-2) attached to USS Hornet (CV-12). He "scored a direct hit to leave a large hostile aircraft carrier leaving it burning and sinking". Captain Grafton Blair Campbell.
That must've been the Hiyo, a 24,000 ton fleet carrier converted from an incomplete passenger liner. The Pearl Harbor veteran Zuikaku as well as Hiyo's sister Jun'yo were also hit by dive bombs but were not sunk.
@@thenumbah1birdman Air Group 2 went after Zuikaku along with Air Group 1 from Yorktown. Hiyo was torpedoed by an Avenger from VT-24 off Belleau Wood and bombed by VB-10 from Enterprise.
@@thenumbah1birdmanAlways take veteran stories with a grain of salt lol. The fact that he likely hit the Zuikaku is a huge honor as it is, even if he didn’t score the killing blow
The story of one Micheel Vernon is a good read. This guy was enlisted as a scout (meaning he flew the SBD dauntless) in the naval air force, engaged in Midway on both US dive bomber sorties from Enterprise and the Cactus Air Force. His experience with the SB2C after returning from Guadalcanal and then joining CV-8 Yorktown war that it was comparable to "flying a brick". He flew it through the 1943-44 push through the Philippines, where his squadron (Bombing 2) encountered many issues, such as failing Bell cranks in the ailerons (meaning they'd snap and cause loss of roll control mid flight), unreliable autocannons that would jam at a rather high rate and bomb pylons that either disconnected when you didn't want em to, or refused to drop the bombs. His last flight on a borrowed SB2C-5 saw his tail hook snap off upon landing; not a great farewell. Info is from Hugh Ambrose's book "The Pacific", highly recommended
The USN managed to get the Corsair, Hellcat, and Avenger in their push for advanced carrier aircraft in 1940-1942 along with the Helldiver, so 3 out of 4 being successful pretty much as soon as they hit the Fleet (even with the F4U's carrier landing problems) is not a bad track record compared to either Royal Navy or Japanese Navy next generation aircraft development at the same time.
You have a point there! Poor US pilots if they had to face the IJN at its height with the American equivalent of the Barracuda, the Roc or the Fulmar...
From what I've read the only problem with landing an F4U on a carrier was the USN pilots. Once the Fleet Air Arm (Eric Brown) showed the USN how it was done they did very well & realized they were a bit premature in giving their planes to the Marines.
True, they are side by side in my mind. If you are interested in the same amount of technical details there is "WWII US Bombers" channel which while covers such narrow and specific topic goes very deeply into unclassified materials and shows all of them. The Chieftain is my go to for tanks though his manner of narrating is more free he clearly has a very good grasp of the subject and dipped into a lot of unclassified reports too. Not to mention that he is an ex-tanker and was inside nearly every surviving tank of any period. Its not much, but its nice when someone you see can say that that tank from WW2 was too cramped or something based on his personal experience
@@DIREWOLFx75 The Navy apparently thought elevator transit was a bottleneck in combat turn-around time. Using advanced hindsight, I think a better answer would have been to change the elevator design as follows: stowed position would be down on the hanger deck, with the hole in the flight deck being covered with retractable armor plates. That would have made it possible to store an aircraft right in the elevator, and thus makes it possible to add another elevator without too much loss of aircraft storage capacity, thereby taking the place of two planes on one elevator (one plane on the elevator would be easier and faster to manage anyway). This also eliminates the time needed to drop the elevator and push a fighter onto it in a scramble; just keep one fully armed in each one, so all that needs to be added is fuel and the pilots.
@@paulbade3566 "The Navy apparently thought elevator transit was a bottleneck in combat turn-around time." Well, yeah of course it was. But trying to solve that by creating a potentially useless plane is just pure idiocy. Figure out how to add more lifts, or how to move planes around or how to make the lifts move faster, make the lifts bigger on the next generation carriers etc etc, there's plenty of far better possible solutions. "I think a better answer would have been to change the elevator design as follows" Might work. Although there would definitely have been some issues with making sure the flight deck mechanism works properly but also that it does not end up making the flight "bumpy", as that could easily cause planes to go tail-up in worst case. "(one plane on the elevator would be easier and faster to manage anyway)" Drastically! To get two planes on a lift means packing them with very small margins of error and that definitely slows things down. . Overall, i think the first part of a solution would be to move over to(or even just ADD) edge of deck lifts, then widening the flight deck(including angled deck), so you can have an extra elevator or even two. Any fleet carrier worth its name is going to be big no matter what, so better make them as good as can get. As an aside, i've also wondered whether you could put the carrier bridge further back, and manage a second angled deck in front of the bridge, in paralell with the angled deck that is normal today. It would crossover the "normal" central deck, but it would still allow you to put 6 catapults on a carrier, as well as provide more space where you could fit a lift, and also provide an extra alternative for landing if there's an accident on one of the decks.
@@DIREWOLFx75 If I recall correctly, the Midway class of carriers was originally built with deck-edge elevators. I saw a proposal for a double angle deck but it was rejected because the carrier would have be much wider to keep it from being top-heavy, which means it has to be longer to maintain speed performance, necessitating much larger powerplants, etc. This would be awkward at the Panama and Suez Canals and many ports. At that point, buying another carrier to have an alternative landing space makes more tactical sense ("Don't put all of the eggs in one basket."), and doesn't cost too much more. In the Navy's defense, they wanted something that could be a drop-in replacement for the Dauntless without pulling existing carriers out of the war for modifications. But sometimes demanding too much could mean getting less than what you need or paying too high a price for it. The Mark 14 torpedo and (decades later) the A-12 Avenger are other examples.
The requirement for two of them to fit on a single elevator on top of everything else kinda reminds me of some game studios trying to concept, develop and publish a AAA game in a single year and proceed to surprise pikachu face when folk hate it. That's why it pays massive stonks to have an experienced designer on the bean-counter team to just point-out what's achievable within reason. But then again, they'd have to *pay* that designer instead of keeping the money for themselves so what do I know.
4:30 you can see how additional spare aircraft were disassembled and stored in the rafters in the hanger bay until needed as parts or to replace losses.
Take an aircraft with known and pretty severe stability issues, add hastily trained green pilots and then put them in the most challenging situation possible-carrier aviation in wartime. Just to spice things up, add in a hurried production schedule with less than stellar quality control, and you get the perfect storm of the SB2C. Even after they had supposedly worked out all the kinks, the SB2C was still a difficult aircraft to fly. Even the transition training film for pilots (available on TH-cam) points out "potential" stability issues and what to watch for and how to handle them.
I think it's safe to say that the proper way to fulfil any design specification coming from the brass is to toss it out entirely and build something that works instead.
+Excellent coverage of this aircraft. Having only read of the exploits of Hellcat flyers in the later Pacific battles, I never knew of the extensive "teething" problems. Looking forward to the deep dive. Your commentary is inimitable. Even when I have watched other's videos of an aircraft, when I find a Rex's Hangar I dive into it, knowing that you will inform and entertain - Congratulations and thanks.
So, the Navy required the requirements for the Helldiver was the U.S Navy ordering a W.W.II "Tardis". They expected Curtis to use "Temporal Engineering" the plane had to be bigger inside than the outer dimensions allowed.
My father was a WW2 vintage Naval Aviator. He used to say that more Navy pilots were killed by the Curtiss Aircraft Company than by the Mitsubishi company. He related than early Helldivers had the unfortunate positioning of the dive brakes control located on the control stick where it could easily be accidentally deployed during a catapult launch. Straight into the “drink”.
It always kinda amazes me that with all of the tens of thousands of American and British warbirds produced in WW2, that only few are left in flying condition today in 2023.
There's death and taxes, but another sure thing in life is that hydraulics leak. No matter the design and quality of fittings and hoses, or the skill of the engineers, they leak -- often constantly. Some more than others. Good systems just leak a tiny bit in a manageable way, but even they can suddenly decide to spring a random reservoir emptying leak. Compressed air systems can be fun too, but far less messy. Another is pressurized ammonia gas for refrigeration. There always tends to be a whiff of it about, due to it escaping fittings and seals etc. Accidental rupture of the lines can be fatal and will be if a person can not get away from the leak fast enough (one of the only emergency drills where crew are not told to walk calmly, but to carefully run like fv
Having been around hydraulic systems (industrial) most of my working life I absolutely agree. All types of actuaying systems have their quirks. Pneumatic systems also leak and in my opinion are both weaker and less controllable. Electrical systems especially during this period were likely heavier. The leaks in hydraulic systems can usually be traced to fittings, hoses and actuator seals in that order. The fitting leakage IMO depends on the amount of contact area in the fitting itself. One of the worst offenders is the 37° flare fitting. Wheatherhead compression fittings leak less but if they need to be repaired on site are less forgiving. Also a lot if problems with 37° fittings stem from using thin wall tubing. Hose problems stem from not enough length putting excessive side loads on the hose ends. Actuator seal leaks are usually caused by side loading the rods or output shafts due to misalignment.
It's somebody else mentioned I'm going to also add in, vb-17 tool sb2c-1 models into combat over rabaul, it was the only time for that model but pictures do exist, i recently converted an a-25 shrike kit into an sb2c-1 and while doing research for the markings found this information. In the pictures the older defensive armament of a single .50 is pretty clear, as are the wing .50 cals
Okay--the advertisement ending about 2:55 is one of the few that I've seen that are not intrusive and actually germane to the topic at hand! Good selection, sir!
I read the early SB2C's had aileron control horns that would break under stress. They were made out of some kind of "pot metal". Curtiss knew they were faulty before they sent the aircraft to the fleet.
It looks wrong. Aft fuselage isn’t long enough. Just like the Me-210 (which suffered from similar horrendous directional stability issues) It took Hungarians to say (in Magyar) ‘Nah mate. Just make the fuselage a bit longer’.
Great video, Rex. There was a book retelling all the shenanigans Curtiss was up to while milking the prototyping cow, from the 1920s to the end of aircraft production. The guys basically pocketed money by the hundreds of thousands. Wish I could remember the tittle and author. A real eye-opener.
Jocko Clark threw it off the second Yorktown; sailors called it the "Son of A Bitch 2nd Class". Curtiss went out of the airplane business shortly after WW2.
Lots of aircraft manufacturers either folded or merged with other aircraft manufacturer's to keep from folding after the war, all that's proof of is after the war there just wasn't that much room for that many aircraft manufacturer's that'd swollen to the size they did during the war. All of those companies that folded or merged with others to keep from folding had a long list of reasons why it happened and Curtiss was no different, blaming it happening to any of them because of a single aircraft is nonsense, the reasons are long, involved and would require an entire book on each one to cover it.
very nice video - I'm building a 1/48 Vultee A-31 Vengeance atm and would love you to pull that planes history apart (which almost 2000 were built and probably better than the SB2c except for the bomb load) - for context the SB2C total was 7100ish.. so the even more unloved Vengeance didn't do too bad - and any plane the was designed with the major issue of a miscalculation of CoG has got to be fun!!
@@emjackson2289 Apache I think. Underrated machine the Vengeance. I recently read a book about the air war in Burma/India. It did an excellent close support job there.
My father flew an SBD in combat during WWII from the aircraft carriers USS Hornet (CV8) and the USS Lexington (CV16). In addition to the Battle of Midway, he also saw combat at the Battle of Santa Cruz, the Battle of the Philippine Sea, as well as attacks on Japanese installations at Truk Lagoon, Hollandia, Palau, Wake Island, Wolei, the Marshall Islands, and the Caroline Islands. He was awarded the Navy Cross, the Silver Star, 2 Distinguished Flying Crosses, and 2 Air Medals. Late in the war he was doing test work for rocket development at the Naval Ordnance Test Station (NOTS) in Inyokern California He had flown the SB2C Hell Diver, the F4F Wildcat, the F6F Hellcat and the F4U Corsair, the TBF Avenger, and the F7F Tigercat. After the war he also flew the F2H Banshee. He said that the F7F was his favorite all-time Navy plane to fly because of its awesome power. He hated the SB2C and called it a "Son of A Bitch 2nd Class". He loved and trusted the SBD (Slow But Deadly) which probably saved his life a number of times.
For a long time there was only one SB2C flying (for the Commemorative Air Force) in the United States .....until this year. NOW there are 2 more, thanks to some really skilled restoration crews working with other organizations in the U.S. . I can't wait to see all three flying together at Oshkosh someday !
I had the fortune to know about 4 or 5 pilots that from WWII that just so happened to be dive bomber pilots. They told me to a person that the hell diver was a downgrade in every way possible of being an airplane compared to the dauntless that it was replacing
Excellent vid as usual. Looking forward to the deep dive, as I've never even looked at the Helldiver. It's a pity that the specs were so unattainable, without the endless mods, but you have to give Curtiss credit for never giving up, and for cranking out as many as they did. As for suggestions, how about the Henschel He-123 and the He-126? Both played a serious part in the war.
Curtiss Wright was an absolute shitshow of a company during WW2. It was run by bean counters and was primarily interested in making profits by lobbying for more government contracts without bothering to do any excellent engineering. Don Berlin, the designer of the P-40 (pre-war) left the company, and there really wasn't anybody as capable to replace him.
Maybe a reference to the interwar movie by the same title? Also, there was an earlier Curtiss Scout Bomber by the same name, the SBC, which was a biplane.
I like the helldiver yes the Dauntless was a great aircraft but couldn’t hold the ordnance as the big tailed bastard. It sank more ships than the Slow But Deadly SBD😅 Dauntless . It and the Avenger were a great team .
I’ll tell you what, the SB2C-1c and -4 are a beast in the digital sky’s of War Thunder and a little under appreciated / under estimated by the players in that game.
Another excellent video from you. Thanks for your time in doing such a good work. And let me add, thank you for your very clear english ( I´m not a anative speaker, I speak spanish as my native language). My best wishes and keep on going!
This is what happens when something is rushed. The Dauntless was getting the job done and could outperform Zeros in a dog fight. One pilot out on patrol was jumped by 3 Zeros where he and his gunner managed to shoot down all 3 during a prolonged dogfight that lasted 20 to 30 minutes. The Dauntless pilot took advantage of the Zeros inability to dive hard to the right or take extreme turns without losing a wing. He used the dive brakes to take sharp hard turns so the Zero behind him flew by the rear gunner who placed some rounds into it with the pilot making another sharp turn to get some more in once flying by in his sights. Once back at his carrier, the pilot gave a detailed report on how he maneuvered then was transferred to a fighter squadron.
Rex, you are favorite channel, please never stop. I really mean that. I mean this in the best possible way, you are the Bob Ross of history. I could listen to you all day
The SBD Dauntless is what won the war in the Pacific, especially at Midway. Helldiver was no match. I think that dauntless is one of the most underrated planes of the war
You failed to mention that the USN wanted a powered rear gun turret, as utilized in the Grumman Avenger, in their new dive bomber. That requirement soon fell by the wayside due to weight and developmental delay considerations. Incidentally, the Columbus, Ohio factory that built the SB2Cs was taken over after the war by North American Aviation and was the source of the Vigilante production.
The Avenger was capable of carrying bombs as well as torpedoes, and could drop them in a dive of up to about 60 degrees, which wasn't as steep as a purpose-built dive bomber but could still give a fair degree of accuracy. I've got a book by a WW2 USMC Avenger pilot ("Flights of Passage" by Samuel Hynes) whose strike missions were all flown using bombs against ground targets. He also flew anti-submarine patrols carrying depth charges. The only time he dropped a torpedo was in training.
@@CharlesStearman Yes, TBF was capable of droppng bombs but it was not a dive bomber at any means. Obviously the helldiver could have been canceled but army, and army at war needs constant improvements and upgrades so a new generation weapon is always needed. Its one of the reason axis lost the war btw. Because they never changed it was the zero on japan and BF109 FW190 Ju87 on germany while USSR England and US constantly built new or very heavily imrpoved aircraft. Same was with tanks germany started and ended with T-4 as its main battle tank, that was not really improved since late 1941.
The Truman Committee is an interesting piece of wartime history, especially their investigation into Brewster, which was a total disaster zone. Now that would make an interesting video.
And post war examinations showed that most of the Truman committee's findings were wrong, them blaming the prototype B29 for crashing into the meat packing plant in Kansas City on an engine fire is a perfect example, not only was it later proven to be wrong but also started a bunch of myths about B29's and engine fires most of which are nonsense but last to this day, it was actually a faulty designed fuel filler line near the engine that'd spilled gas all over it which of course caught on fire that was the cause. Like any other politician Truman was looking to make a name for himself and whether or not he actually found out the truth about something he still had to act like he did, like any politician he'd make things up if he had to just to be impressive. I wouldn't trust a political committee from the 1940's anymore than I'd trust one from today.
@@fishingthelist4017 Not really, like most of the bad narratives about US aircraft and their production during the war it's nonsense, things taken out of context or them not given credit for things they should be or worse yet credit for things not their fault are never looked at by people who just jump on the "bash them while everyone else is" bandwagon, the B26 Marauder is a perfect example, videos about it and the comments in them are full of people who spread the death trap myth about it when the fact is B26's had the record for most missions flown or tonnage dropped or whatever by US bombers yet ended the war with the highest crew survivability record. Greg Boyington loved the early variant of the Brewster Buffalo and said they'd actually out maneuver a Zero, he said they'd "turn inside of a phone booth", and the Buffalo had an excellent record with the Finnish air force. The problem was AFTER they were designed the Navy required Brewster to add on a bunch of weight from the latest innovations like self sealing fuel tanks and other new developments which naturally trashed it's performance, which by the way is the same exact thing that happened to the Zero when they tried up armoring it, that's why only about 400 examples of that variant were made with the majority kept in the rear as trainers. As far as any aircraft that weren't of Brewsters design that they may have been told to produce all the companies that produced designs from other companies had major production issues doing that, and it spawned from companies resenting another one getting hold of their designs so they all did everything they could to make it difficult for them to the point where the presidents of them got called to Washington and got their asses chewed off for doing it, they withheld latest changes till the last second and all kinds of other dirty tricks in an attempt to make other companies look bad who were trying to build their designs, they way they saw it other companies got to benefit from their R&D and innovations that they'd be able to use to compete against them after the war. Brewster didn't have anymore problems than anyone else producing someone else's design, people just love picking on them because it's convenient because everyone else is does it, like a kid in school that's already being picked on it's easy for anyone else to come along and do it.
Can you ellaborate a little on the slats in the SB2? This seems to be one of the earliest types with movable leading edge aerodynamic control surfaces that I recollect. Thank you Rex for your always interesting deliveries.
Although interested, I'm no expert in all things military. However I would suggest more capable and powerful aircraft are needed to use bigger and better weapons and hence need larger carriers to suit. Not the other way around?
@@cancermcaids7688 yes, good point. What prompted my comment however was that the British realised that with jets almost certainly coming into service postwar, much larger carriers would be needed to handle the size and weight of the new combat aircraft, or so I've read anyway.....They probably had more experience than anyone in operating such ships and were in the forefront of developing the new planes too.
This sounds like malicious compliance. Somebody at Curtiss Wright took one look at the design brief and said "alright, we are going to make this to exactly your specification and not a single screw or rivet more, and if it turns out to be wildly unstable, then I guess that's tough luck, pal."
I'm 43 I'm from Philadelphia and we have a Air Port just for small business flight's and private plane owners, and some guy has 2 Curtis hell diver's One in training color's and one in the navy blue very cool 😎
1:00 -- RE: Potential Excellence v. Uncompromising Requirements; I'm not disputing you here, but there was at least one unintended consequence to this with an excellent outcome. To wit, aircraft like the Helldiver were quite well armed and *if* any given aircraft managed to get itself into a heavily damaged and/or unflyable state, the guns on the airframe might be available for use by ground troops. Enter the "Stinger", a modification of the AN/M2 .30 caliber air-cooled machine gun, modified by Marines in the Pacific. The Helldiver has 2 of these weapons in the rear turret.
Couple of other small deets I cannot let pass: = Stingers emerged as a concept in 1943; = The .30 cals were completely suitable for the purposes of ground combat despite being in the South Pacific and at or near sea level; because = A Stinger was light enough for a single Marine to reposition it and to man it. The Marine would not be expected to provide "walking fire" from his hip, either; and = As long as the gun was being fired in short controlled bursts it wouldn't over-heat; so = Among other external modifications to the gun was the addition of an ammo box to one side of the gun which could hold a 100-round belt of cartridges. But of course, there's the *other* weapons on the Helldiver: 2 x 20 mm cannons, and 2 x M2 Browning .50 cals. I'm not so sure about potential salvage uses for a 20 mm cannon, but for sure the .50 cals could have found other potential employment mounted on ground vehicles or a static emplacement.
For me, The dauntless was the United States equivalent of the stuka. That is, pretty darn good and hard to beat but eventually dated and no Superior replacement replacement was forthcoming.
Was it really all that bad ?? 🤔 No, it served well after most of the bugs were hashed out and was much harder hitting than the SBD and more survivable for it's crew !! Short lived as the Skyraider and Jets were coming after the war. Semper Fi ❤🤍💙
Damn, the only thing I know about this is that this is the auto default equip for any aircraft carrier in Azur Lane... Jokes aside, such potential and yet now it is mostly remembered as a cursed by the Aviation Gods machines.
If only Curtis could have built A4U Corsairs, or if only they had somehow managed to build Douglas A4D Skyraiders during the same time frame as the SB2C. Just big fighters converted into bomb trucks. But it must be said the Corsair didn't arrive at the A4U varient until some overwrought doctrine was dispensed with. That same doctrine held back the Skyraider.
F4U ;) as far as i know Brewster and GM built F4Us in license, no need for Curtiss to join F4U product. but they built P-47`s Thunderbolts in license in Curtiss Buffallo NY plant , all Curtiss built P-47 had the P-47G-CU designation
Hold up 9:44 from prop centerline to wing tip it was 25’0” wide but overall width is 49’8-5/8” that’s not how math works “I may not be a smart man but I know something fucked up when I see it”-Forrest gump
'Nail on a bigger engine' doesn't always work, or if it does it tends to result in dramatic changes to the original airframe. Merlin-engined Spitfire Mk1 to Griffon-engined Mk XIV being a case in point.
@@EmyrDerfel Yep, I had got it fom an Ospray book about the Helldiver when I was in my twentys in the 1980s. Like why is the P47 Thunderbolt called the Jug, It's not Juggernaught, its Milk Jug.
Mr pug makes a good point. Here's the thing. There are so many aircraft that suffer the same way as the helldiver. Even now. The a6m zero had this, the p 47 had this. I think the f-35 is having this issue among many many others. Weird and resicting design requirements, lack of flexibility, experience, you name it. In time they can end up being absolute legends. Or the lessons learned from them help develop other legends.
![The WW2 Super Fighter That Was Built Backwards | Curtiss XP-55 Ascender [Aircraft Overview #76]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/NJNc4rvf_qs/mqdefault.jpg)
Check out Ikarus Art here → ikarusart.net/ and use the code REX to get 10% off your order.
F.A.Q Section
Q: Do you take aircraft requests?
A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:)
Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others?
A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both.
Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos?
A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :)
Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators?
A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible
Hello Rex's Hangar I have a video request: Could your next video please be about the Zhuchenko vertoplan please and thank you?
Can you do the ki-32?
This may require a separate video, but could you cover the advantages/disadvantages between all metal verses wood frame aircraft since, at least in the run up to and during the early stages of WW2 those would have been legitimate design considerations.
The Bessler steam plane, it was from the 1930s, so from a period when planes were proper things, it could be used for landing on short runways as the engine was instantly reversable in flight.
I can’t believe you haven’t done a video on the SBD Dauntless yet!
So the US Navy wanted a plane that was bigger on the inside while being smaller on the outside? Did they think Curtis built the TARDIS?
Apparently.🙄🙄🙄🙄
Nah, they just expected them to hire Harry Potter...
Oh hoho ho
You can spot middle management influence anywhere...
The US navy was kinda fucking insane in WW2
My father was a naval aviator who began his flying career in '42. During WWII, the flew the F4F, the F6F, the F4U and managed to even get some stick time in on SBDs. After the war, his first command (this was about '47) was an SB2C squadron out of NAS Glynco, GA. He said that as challenging as the F4U was (they called it the "Ensign Eliminator"), the Big Tailed Beast scared the hell out of him. The initial variants had an electrical problem and sometimes the wing-mounted ordinance wouldn't drop from the pylons when toggled, the end result being that the wings would snap off when a pilot pulled out of a dive. Nice........
I'm about an hour from Glynco. I have done a large portion of what flight training I have received out of the airport there
"Ensign Eliminator", lol...always love that military gallows humor
Bug report - Bombs do not deploy, leading to wings snapping off.
Response - Intended behaviour, will not fix.
F4U was impossible to land on a carrier until Eric Brown (Royal Fleet Air Arm) came in with a left turn and landed easily. Eventually even the USN accepted that this was actually a superb aircraft and really no harder to land than any other aircraft of the day.
Your father would be fascinating to talk to. Grateful for his service.
My old college girlfriend's dad was a Helldiver pilot. Earned the Navy Cross in the First Battle of the Philippine Sea 20 June 1944 as Commanding Officer of Bombing Squadron 2 (VB-2) attached to USS Hornet (CV-12). He "scored a direct hit to leave a large hostile aircraft carrier leaving it burning and sinking". Captain Grafton Blair Campbell.
You could have just said "Captain Grafton Blair Campbell" and we would have assumed he was a hero from the 40s. Amazing name.
That must've been the Hiyo, a 24,000 ton fleet carrier converted from an incomplete passenger liner. The Pearl Harbor veteran Zuikaku as well as Hiyo's sister Jun'yo were also hit by dive bombs but were not sunk.
@@thenumbah1birdman Air Group 2 went after Zuikaku along with Air Group 1 from Yorktown. Hiyo was torpedoed by an Avenger from VT-24 off Belleau Wood and bombed by VB-10 from Enterprise.
@@ph89787 Ah
@@thenumbah1birdmanAlways take veteran stories with a grain of salt lol. The fact that he likely hit the Zuikaku is a huge honor as it is, even if he didn’t score the killing blow
My grandparents neighbor flew these during WW2- He always said "SB2C" was the planes rate (rank)- SB2C= "Son of a B*** 2nd Class"
And a plane doesn't get a nickname as supremely un flattering as that without some reason for it.
Also nicknamed "The Beast" because of its issues.
@@cjmanson5692 A slightly more flattering nickname, to be fair..
Hi! :3
I heard that sob 2nd class thing in the first time i heard of this thing. The dogfights episode death of the Japanese navy. Always liked it tho.
My father was given a choice as radio operator/gunner between the SB2C and PBY...he said, ".....PBY" :)
Wise choice. :)
Chose right.
He chose wisely.
Not even a few seconds to think about it! 😅
Id choose pby. Just scouting and spotting.
The story of one Micheel Vernon is a good read. This guy was enlisted as a scout (meaning he flew the SBD dauntless) in the naval air force, engaged in Midway on both US dive bomber sorties from Enterprise and the Cactus Air Force. His experience with the SB2C after returning from Guadalcanal and then joining CV-8 Yorktown war that it was comparable to "flying a brick". He flew it through the 1943-44 push through the Philippines, where his squadron (Bombing 2) encountered many issues, such as failing Bell cranks in the ailerons (meaning they'd snap and cause loss of roll control mid flight), unreliable autocannons that would jam at a rather high rate and bomb pylons that either disconnected when you didn't want em to, or refused to drop the bombs. His last flight on a borrowed SB2C-5 saw his tail hook snap off upon landing; not a great farewell. Info is from Hugh Ambrose's book "The Pacific", highly recommended
The USN managed to get the Corsair, Hellcat, and Avenger in their push for advanced carrier aircraft in 1940-1942 along with the Helldiver, so 3 out of 4 being successful pretty much as soon as they hit the Fleet (even with the F4U's carrier landing problems) is not a bad track record compared to either Royal Navy or Japanese Navy next generation aircraft development at the same time.
Yeah, but Corsair and Avenger both had massive teething problems to start with too, so maybe 1/4 is more accurate for 1942 at least.
You have a point there! Poor US pilots if they had to face the IJN at its height with the American equivalent of the Barracuda, the Roc or the Fulmar...
From what I've read the only problem with landing an F4U on a carrier was the USN pilots. Once the Fleet Air Arm (Eric Brown) showed the USN how it was done they did very well & realized they were a bit premature in giving their planes to the Marines.
@@aussie6910 RN pilots were landing F4U's on escort carriers IIRC.
@@recoil53 Yes, with a turning approach the USN hadn't thought of.
Rex's Hangar has really become a aviation equivalent of Drachinifel's contribution to naval history knowledge.
Greg's Airplanes is pretty good, too.
True, they are side by side in my mind. If you are interested in the same amount of technical details there is "WWII US Bombers" channel which while covers such narrow and specific topic goes very deeply into unclassified materials and shows all of them.
The Chieftain is my go to for tanks though his manner of narrating is more free he clearly has a very good grasp of the subject and dipped into a lot of unclassified reports too. Not to mention that he is an ex-tanker and was inside nearly every surviving tank of any period. Its not much, but its nice when someone you see can say that that tank from WW2 was too cramped or something based on his personal experience
I saw the only flying Helldiver at the Oshkosh Airshow. Pretty special to stand next to it and see it fly.
Pretty much a "to urgent to fail" situation, making two units fit on the carrier lift platform made for an extreme challenge.
I just can't get over how stupid that requirement was.
@@DIREWOLFx75 The Navy apparently thought elevator transit was a bottleneck in combat turn-around time. Using advanced hindsight, I think a better answer would have been to change the elevator design as follows: stowed position would be down on the hanger deck, with the hole in the flight deck being covered with retractable armor plates. That would have made it possible to store an aircraft right in the elevator, and thus makes it possible to add another elevator without too much loss of aircraft storage capacity, thereby taking the place of two planes on one elevator (one plane on the elevator would be easier and faster to manage anyway). This also eliminates the time needed to drop the elevator and push a fighter onto it in a scramble; just keep one fully armed in each one, so all that needs to be added is fuel and the pilots.
@@paulbade3566 "The Navy apparently thought elevator transit was a bottleneck in combat turn-around time."
Well, yeah of course it was. But trying to solve that by creating a potentially useless plane is just pure idiocy. Figure out how to add more lifts, or how to move planes around or how to make the lifts move faster, make the lifts bigger on the next generation carriers etc etc, there's plenty of far better possible solutions.
"I think a better answer would have been to change the elevator design as follows"
Might work. Although there would definitely have been some issues with making sure the flight deck mechanism works properly but also that it does not end up making the flight "bumpy", as that could easily cause planes to go tail-up in worst case.
"(one plane on the elevator would be easier and faster to manage anyway)"
Drastically! To get two planes on a lift means packing them with very small margins of error and that definitely slows things down.
.
Overall, i think the first part of a solution would be to move over to(or even just ADD) edge of deck lifts, then widening the flight deck(including angled deck), so you can have an extra elevator or even two.
Any fleet carrier worth its name is going to be big no matter what, so better make them as good as can get.
As an aside, i've also wondered whether you could put the carrier bridge further back, and manage a second angled deck in front of the bridge, in paralell with the angled deck that is normal today.
It would crossover the "normal" central deck, but it would still allow you to put 6 catapults on a carrier, as well as provide more space where you could fit a lift, and also provide an extra alternative for landing if there's an accident on one of the decks.
@@DIREWOLFx75 If I recall correctly, the Midway class of carriers was originally built with deck-edge elevators.
I saw a proposal for a double angle deck but it was rejected because the carrier would have be much wider to keep it from being top-heavy, which means it has to be longer to maintain speed performance, necessitating much larger powerplants, etc. This would be awkward at the Panama and Suez Canals and many ports. At that point, buying another carrier to have an alternative landing space makes more tactical sense ("Don't put all of the eggs in one basket."), and doesn't cost too much more.
In the Navy's defense, they wanted something that could be a drop-in replacement for the Dauntless without pulling existing carriers out of the war for modifications. But sometimes demanding too much could mean getting less than what you need or paying too high a price for it. The Mark 14 torpedo and (decades later) the A-12 Avenger are other examples.
The requirement for two of them to fit on a single elevator on top of everything else kinda reminds me of some game studios trying to concept, develop and publish a AAA game in a single year and proceed to surprise pikachu face when folk hate it. That's why it pays massive stonks to have an experienced designer on the bean-counter team to just point-out what's achievable within reason. But then again, they'd have to *pay* that designer instead of keeping the money for themselves so what do I know.
What? Didn't Curtiss have TARDIS technology yet?
Pointing out what's achievable to the Navy is an exercise in futility no matter how much you pay someone to try.🤷♂️
4:30 you can see how additional spare aircraft were disassembled and stored in the rafters in the hanger bay until needed as parts or to replace losses.
Take an aircraft with known and pretty severe stability issues, add hastily trained green pilots and then put them in the most challenging situation possible-carrier aviation in wartime. Just to spice things up, add in a hurried production schedule with less than stellar quality control, and you get the perfect storm of the SB2C. Even after they had supposedly worked out all the kinks, the SB2C was still a difficult aircraft to fly. Even the transition training film for pilots (available on TH-cam) points out "potential" stability issues and what to watch for and how to handle them.
A terrific introductory video to the Helldiver, and I look forward to watching the deep dive video(s) in the future. Top work, as always, Rex!
I think it's safe to say that the proper way to fulfil any design specification coming from the brass is to toss it out entirely and build something that works instead.
+Excellent coverage of this aircraft. Having only read of the exploits of Hellcat flyers in the later Pacific battles, I never knew of the extensive "teething" problems. Looking forward to the deep dive.
Your commentary is inimitable. Even when I have watched other's videos of an aircraft, when I find a Rex's Hangar I dive into it, knowing that you will inform and entertain - Congratulations and thanks.
A video that is almost 25 minutes long and has the words "In depth" & "Later video" in it. You just know this is going to be a doozy.
I love how the prototype broke up and the thought was “eh let’s put it into production. It’ll be fine.” Not “Maybe we should make more prototypes”
So, the Navy required the requirements for the Helldiver was the U.S Navy ordering a W.W.II "Tardis". They expected Curtis to use "Temporal Engineering" the plane had to be bigger inside than the outer dimensions allowed.
My father was a WW2 vintage Naval Aviator. He used to say that more Navy pilots were killed by the Curtiss Aircraft Company than by the Mitsubishi company. He related than early Helldivers had the unfortunate positioning of the dive brakes control located on the control stick where it could easily be accidentally deployed during a catapult launch. Straight into the “drink”.
A WW ll Helldiver pilot said the cockpit layout looked entirely like the result of afterthoughts.
It always kinda amazes me that with all of the tens of thousands of American and British warbirds produced in WW2, that only few are left in flying condition today in 2023.
Well the Brits were really in desperate need of scrap post-war. So much so, they even murdered and sliced up their most storied warship (Warspite)
There's death and taxes, but another sure thing in life is that hydraulics leak. No matter the design and quality of fittings and hoses, or the skill of the engineers, they leak -- often constantly. Some more than others. Good systems just leak a tiny bit in a manageable way, but even they can suddenly decide to spring a random reservoir emptying leak. Compressed air systems can be fun too, but far less messy.
Another is pressurized ammonia gas for refrigeration. There always tends to be a whiff of it about, due to it escaping fittings and seals etc. Accidental rupture of the lines can be fatal and will be if a person can not get away from the leak fast enough (one of the only emergency drills where crew are not told to walk calmly, but to carefully run like fv
Having been around hydraulic systems (industrial) most of my working life I absolutely agree. All types of actuaying systems have their quirks. Pneumatic systems also leak and in my opinion are both weaker and less controllable. Electrical systems especially during this period were likely heavier.
The leaks in hydraulic systems can usually be traced to fittings, hoses and actuator seals in that order.
The fitting leakage IMO depends on the amount of contact area in the fitting itself. One of the worst offenders is the 37° flare fitting. Wheatherhead compression fittings leak less but if they need to be repaired on site are less forgiving. Also a lot if problems with 37° fittings stem from using thin wall tubing. Hose problems stem from not enough length putting excessive side loads on the hose ends. Actuator seal leaks are usually caused by side loading the rods or output shafts due to misalignment.
little did the Navy know they already had a div bomber in the F4U
Thank you for this excellent overview of a troubled but fascinating plane! I sincerely look forward to your forthcoming deep-dive
It's somebody else mentioned I'm going to also add in, vb-17 tool sb2c-1 models into combat over rabaul, it was the only time for that model but pictures do exist, i recently converted an a-25 shrike kit into an sb2c-1 and while doing research for the markings found this information. In the pictures the older defensive armament of a single .50 is pretty clear, as are the wing .50 cals
Okay--the advertisement ending about 2:55 is one of the few that I've seen that are not intrusive and actually germane to the topic at hand! Good selection, sir!
I read the early SB2C's had aileron control horns that would break under stress. They were made out of some kind of "pot metal". Curtiss knew they were faulty before they sent the aircraft to the fleet.
F...you 2
It looks wrong. Aft fuselage isn’t long enough.
Just like the Me-210 (which suffered from similar horrendous directional stability issues)
It took Hungarians to say (in Magyar) ‘Nah mate. Just make the fuselage a bit longer’.
Great video, Rex. There was a book retelling all the shenanigans Curtiss was up to while milking the prototyping cow, from the 1920s to the end of aircraft production. The guys basically pocketed money by the hundreds of thousands. Wish I could remember the tittle and author. A real eye-opener.
Reminds me of the F-4 Phantom... they had to make a ton of corrections on it.
Like adding a gun to it because they vastly overestimated the performance of early guided missiles.
@@lonelystrategos - Yup.
@@aggravatedfruit_au The gun may not be that important, but they still put one on most modern fighters, just in case.
@@aggravatedfruit_au - thank you, that's very interesting.
@@lonelystrategosnot the F-35B or C, though the USMC and USN have purchased "gun pods" for them.
Jocko Clark threw it off the second Yorktown; sailors called it the "Son of A Bitch 2nd Class".
Curtiss went out of the airplane business shortly after WW2.
Hello! :3
Lots of aircraft manufacturers either folded or merged with other aircraft manufacturer's to keep from folding after the war, all that's proof of is after the war there just wasn't that much room for that many aircraft manufacturer's that'd swollen to the size they did during the war.
All of those companies that folded or merged with others to keep from folding had a long list of reasons why it happened and Curtiss was no different, blaming it happening to any of them because of a single aircraft is nonsense, the reasons are long, involved and would require an entire book on each one to cover it.
very nice video - I'm building a 1/48 Vultee A-31 Vengeance atm and would love you to pull that planes history apart (which almost 2000 were built and probably better than the SB2c except for the bomb load) - for context the SB2C total was 7100ish.. so the even more unloved Vengeance didn't do too bad - and any plane the was designed with the major issue of a miscalculation of CoG has got to be fun!!
And there was the oft forgotten Mustang dive-bomber, the A36 (Invader?)
@@emjackson2289 Apache I think.
Underrated machine the Vengeance. I recently read a book about the air war in Burma/India. It did an excellent close support job there.
My father flew an SBD in combat during WWII from the aircraft carriers USS Hornet (CV8) and the USS Lexington (CV16). In addition to the Battle of Midway, he also saw combat at the Battle of Santa Cruz, the Battle of the Philippine Sea, as well as attacks on Japanese installations at Truk Lagoon, Hollandia, Palau, Wake Island, Wolei, the Marshall Islands, and the Caroline Islands. He was awarded the Navy Cross, the Silver Star, 2 Distinguished Flying Crosses, and 2 Air Medals. Late in the war he was doing test work for rocket development at the Naval Ordnance Test Station (NOTS) in Inyokern California He had flown the SB2C Hell Diver, the F4F Wildcat, the F6F Hellcat and the F4U Corsair, the TBF Avenger, and the F7F Tigercat. After the war he also flew the F2H Banshee. He said that the F7F was his favorite all-time Navy plane to fly because of its awesome power. He hated the SB2C and called it a "Son of A Bitch 2nd Class". He loved and trusted the SBD (Slow But Deadly) which probably saved his life a number of times.
For a long time there was only one SB2C flying (for the Commemorative Air Force) in the United States .....until this year. NOW there are 2 more, thanks to some really skilled restoration crews working with other organizations in the U.S. . I can't wait to see all three flying together at Oshkosh someday !
It was a flying wing that thought it was an airplane & dressed that way. It killed Curtiss - Wright.
I had the fortune to know about 4 or 5 pilots that from WWII that just so happened to be dive bomber pilots. They told me to a person that the hell diver was a downgrade in every way possible of being an airplane compared to the dauntless that it was replacing
Take a look at the ceiling of the hanger deck at 4:25…..never knew they hung airplanes from the ceiling.
At the time they were light enough and small enough.
How have I only JUST NOW found such an amazing channel???
My great great grandfather commanded the USS Yorktown, didn't realize he did he had helldivers on there
What does that even mean? It's the standard dive bomber of the Navy?
Love your work! BTW, the imperial range value at 17:22 seems to have picked up an extra digit along the way.
Yes, it had a lot of flaws, but it did look, to my eyes, quite good.
I didn't know Helldivers had that many problems 😮
Excellent vid as usual. Looking forward to the deep dive, as I've never even looked at the Helldiver. It's a pity that the specs were so unattainable, without the endless mods, but you have to give Curtiss credit for never giving up, and for cranking out as many as they did. As for suggestions, how about the Henschel He-123 and the He-126? Both played a serious part in the war.
From an aesthetic standpoint, I love the SB2C. I’ve seen one in pieces being rebuilt at Yanks but never a complete model. I hope to see one someday.
Curtiss Wright was an absolute shitshow of a company during WW2. It was run by bean counters and was primarily interested in making profits by lobbying for more government contracts without bothering to do any excellent engineering. Don Berlin, the designer of the P-40 (pre-war) left the company, and there really wasn't anybody as capable to replace him.
Believe it or not, there were companies even worse than Curtis.
@@WALTERBROADDUS* Brewster enters the chat
I never knew the navy stored aircraft in the cieling of the hangar bay 4:10 😮
Wow, so many good photos!
Hilariously,in the movie "Midway, as the divebombers pounce on the Japanese carriers, a Japanese crewmember points upward and yells "Helldivers !"
Maybe a reference to the interwar movie by the same title? Also, there was an earlier Curtiss Scout Bomber by the same name, the SBC, which was a biplane.
@@MrDgwphotos the sad fact is that the original SBC was an excellent dive bomber for its era.
I like the helldiver yes the Dauntless was a great aircraft but couldn’t hold the ordnance as the big tailed bastard. It sank more ships than the Slow But Deadly SBD😅 Dauntless . It and the Avenger were a great team .
It's amazing how the torpedo bombers of the U.S. Navy evolved to be more useful and versatile while the dive bombers went the opposite direction.
I’ll tell you what, the SB2C-1c and -4 are a beast in the digital sky’s of War Thunder and a little under appreciated / under estimated by the players in that game.
Another excellent video from you. Thanks for your time in doing such a good work. And let me add, thank you for your very clear english ( I´m not a anative speaker, I speak spanish as my native language). My best wishes and keep on going!
This is what happens when something is rushed. The Dauntless was getting the job done and could outperform Zeros in a dog fight. One pilot out on patrol was jumped by 3 Zeros where he and his gunner managed to shoot down all 3 during a prolonged dogfight that lasted 20 to 30 minutes. The Dauntless pilot took advantage of the Zeros inability to dive hard to the right or take extreme turns without losing a wing. He used the dive brakes to take sharp hard turns so the Zero behind him flew by the rear gunner who placed some rounds into it with the pilot making another sharp turn to get some more in once flying by in his sights. Once back at his carrier, the pilot gave a detailed report on how he maneuvered then was transferred to a fighter squadron.
The pilot was the "Swede".
Rex, you are favorite channel, please never stop. I really mean that. I mean this in the best possible way, you are the Bob Ross of history. I could listen to you all day
The SBD Dauntless is what won the war in the Pacific, especially at Midway. Helldiver was no match. I think that dauntless is one of the most underrated planes of the war
One thing we can all agree on, the final production version of the Hell Diver was far superior to the best version of the Ju 87.
Single proto, fly it of the assembly line for testing was standard in 41 and 43.
16:21 USS Enterprise (CV-6)’s VB-20.
You failed to mention that the USN wanted a powered rear gun turret, as utilized in the
Grumman Avenger, in their new dive bomber. That requirement soon fell by the wayside
due to weight and developmental delay considerations. Incidentally, the Columbus, Ohio
factory that built the SB2Cs was taken over after the war by North American Aviation
and was the source of the Vigilante production.
They should've just modified the Avenger to do dive-bombing as well, it would've been cheaper and it would ease logistics.
Who knows? Nothing is easy and maybe it was not possible. At least there was the dauntless
The Avenger was capable of carrying bombs as well as torpedoes, and could drop them in a dive of up to about 60 degrees, which wasn't as steep as a purpose-built dive bomber but could still give a fair degree of accuracy. I've got a book by a WW2 USMC Avenger pilot ("Flights of Passage" by Samuel Hynes) whose strike missions were all flown using bombs against ground targets. He also flew anti-submarine patrols carrying depth charges. The only time he dropped a torpedo was in training.
@@CharlesStearman Yes, TBF was capable of droppng bombs but it was not a dive bomber at any means. Obviously the helldiver could have been canceled but army, and army at war needs constant improvements and upgrades so a new generation weapon is always needed. Its one of the reason axis lost the war btw. Because they never changed it was the zero on japan and BF109 FW190 Ju87 on germany while USSR England and US constantly built new or very heavily imrpoved aircraft. Same was with tanks germany started and ended with T-4 as its main battle tank, that was not really improved since late 1941.
Too slow not enough range or ceiling
@@RobertRentschler, the Helldiver wasn't much faster, and that's why I was saying the TBF be modified to remedy those.
I’ve been waiting for this one.
Well at least the Helldiver name aged like fine wine 😂
The Truman Committee is an interesting piece of wartime history, especially their investigation into Brewster, which was a total disaster zone. Now that would make an interesting video.
And post war examinations showed that most of the Truman committee's findings were wrong, them blaming the prototype B29 for crashing into the meat packing plant in Kansas City on an engine fire is a perfect example, not only was it later proven to be wrong but also started a bunch of myths about B29's and engine fires most of which are nonsense but last to this day, it was actually a faulty designed fuel filler line near the engine that'd spilled gas all over it which of course caught on fire that was the cause.
Like any other politician Truman was looking to make a name for himself and whether or not he actually found out the truth about something he still had to act like he did, like any politician he'd make things up if he had to just to be impressive.
I wouldn't trust a political committee from the 1940's anymore than I'd trust one from today.
OMG! Brewster Aviation, now that was a truly epic tale of incompetence, mismanagement, poor design choices, and corruption.
Aircraft produced by Brewster made Helldivers look rock solid reliable.
@@fishingthelist4017
Not really, like most of the bad narratives about US aircraft and their production during the war it's nonsense, things taken out of context or them not given credit for things they should be or worse yet credit for things not their fault are never looked at by people who just jump on the "bash them while everyone else is" bandwagon, the B26 Marauder is a perfect example, videos about it and the comments in them are full of people who spread the death trap myth about it when the fact is B26's had the record for most missions flown or tonnage dropped or whatever by US bombers yet ended the war with the highest crew survivability record.
Greg Boyington loved the early variant of the Brewster Buffalo and said they'd actually out maneuver a Zero, he said they'd "turn inside of a phone booth", and the Buffalo had an excellent record with the Finnish air force.
The problem was AFTER they were designed the Navy required Brewster to add on a bunch of weight from the latest innovations like self sealing fuel tanks and other new developments which naturally trashed it's performance, which by the way is the same exact thing that happened to the Zero when they tried up armoring it, that's why only about 400 examples of that variant were made with the majority kept in the rear as trainers.
As far as any aircraft that weren't of Brewsters design that they may have been told to produce all the companies that produced designs from other companies had major production issues doing that, and it spawned from companies resenting another one getting hold of their designs so they all did everything they could to make it difficult for them to the point where the presidents of them got called to Washington and got their asses chewed off for doing it, they withheld latest changes till the last second and all kinds of other dirty tricks in an attempt to make other companies look bad who were trying to build their designs, they way they saw it other companies got to benefit from their R&D and innovations that they'd be able to use to compete against them after the war.
Brewster didn't have anymore problems than anyone else producing someone else's design, people just love picking on them because it's convenient because everyone else is does it, like a kid in school that's already being picked on it's easy for anyone else to come along and do it.
@@dukecraig2402 I was referring to the Buccaneer.
Can you ellaborate a little on the slats in the SB2? This seems to be one of the earliest types with movable leading edge aerodynamic control surfaces that I recollect. Thank you Rex for your always interesting deliveries.
Actually, this aircraft already had the capability of carrying one Mk-13 MOD-1 torpedo, from the very begining, Rex.
Although interested, I'm no expert in all things military. However I would suggest more capable and powerful aircraft are needed to use bigger and better weapons and hence need larger carriers to suit. Not the other way around?
@@cancermcaids7688 yes, good point. What prompted my comment however was that the British realised that with jets almost certainly coming into service postwar, much larger carriers would be needed to handle the size and weight of the new combat aircraft, or so I've read anyway.....They probably had more experience than anyone in operating such ships and were in the forefront of developing the new planes too.
And here I thought the B-29 had problems. Good Grief!!!
Some of the backdrops for Ikarus art look an awful lot like Just Cause 3. No bad thing, as that game was a stunner
Very interesting video! And more to come too on the topic, nice~
Legends say, that the japanese got the idea for kamikaze attacks from watching some Helldivers diving to hell and never coming back.
Looking forward to the movie-length video. And I mean that...
You've come up with some wonderfully droll insults but I don't think you can beat "pulled from service and used as sea anchors" for this plane.
Initial change requirements screw-ups as was with the Short Sterling
Interestingly the Helldiver played a significant role during the last phase of the Greek civil war.
Bravo for this documentary !
Thank you.
This sounds like malicious compliance. Somebody at Curtiss Wright took one look at the design brief and said "alright, we are going to make this to exactly your specification and not a single screw or rivet more, and if it turns out to be wildly unstable, then I guess that's tough luck, pal."
I'm 43 I'm from Philadelphia and we have a Air Port just for small business flight's and private plane owners, and some guy has 2 Curtis hell diver's One in training color's and one in the navy blue very cool 😎
1:00 -- RE: Potential Excellence v. Uncompromising Requirements; I'm not disputing you here, but there was at least one unintended consequence to this with an excellent outcome. To wit, aircraft like the Helldiver were quite well armed and *if* any given aircraft managed to get itself into a heavily damaged and/or unflyable state, the guns on the airframe might be available for use by ground troops.
Enter the "Stinger", a modification of the AN/M2 .30 caliber air-cooled machine gun, modified by Marines in the Pacific. The Helldiver has 2 of these weapons in the rear turret.
Couple of other small deets I cannot let pass:
= Stingers emerged as a concept in 1943;
= The .30 cals were completely suitable for the purposes of ground combat despite being in the South Pacific and at or near sea level; because
= A Stinger was light enough for a single Marine to reposition it and to man it. The Marine would not be expected to provide "walking fire" from his hip, either; and
= As long as the gun was being fired in short controlled bursts it wouldn't over-heat; so
= Among other external modifications to the gun was the addition of an ammo box to one side of the gun which could hold a 100-round belt of cartridges.
But of course, there's the *other* weapons on the Helldiver: 2 x 20 mm cannons, and 2 x M2 Browning .50 cals. I'm not so sure about potential salvage uses for a 20 mm cannon, but for sure the .50 cals could have found other potential employment mounted on ground vehicles or a static emplacement.
NO NO NO NO! I RESPECT YOU REX! BUT YOU'VE GONE TOO FAR! I love the Helldiver :[ (I still do respect you and keep up the good work)
20:58 nice
@rexshangar my shop is currently restoring an SB2C-5 Helldiver. Let me know if you want any detail pictures for your next Helldiver video.
I like the little tiny wheel in the back. Makes it look ridiculous.
Waiting for Helldiver Episode 2 with baited breath
For me, The dauntless was the United States equivalent of the stuka. That is, pretty darn good and hard to beat but eventually dated and no Superior replacement replacement was forthcoming.
Still better than the Brewster alternative...
Was it really all that bad ?? 🤔
No, it served well after most of the bugs were hashed out and was much harder hitting than the SBD and more survivable for it's crew !! Short lived as the Skyraider and Jets were coming after the war. Semper Fi ❤🤍💙
Damn, the only thing I know about this is that this is the auto default equip for any aircraft carrier in Azur Lane...
Jokes aside, such potential and yet now it is mostly remembered as a cursed by the Aviation Gods machines.
Great doco Rex 👍
If only Curtis could have built A4U Corsairs, or if only they had somehow managed to build Douglas A4D Skyraiders during the same time frame as the SB2C. Just big fighters converted into bomb trucks. But it must be said the Corsair didn't arrive at the A4U varient until some overwrought doctrine was dispensed with. That same doctrine held back the Skyraider.
F4U ;) as far as i know Brewster and GM built F4Us in license, no need for Curtiss to join F4U product.
but they built P-47`s Thunderbolts in license in Curtiss Buffallo NY plant , all Curtiss built P-47 had the P-47G-CU designation
Hold up 9:44 from prop centerline to wing tip it was 25’0” wide but overall width is 49’8-5/8” that’s not how math works
“I may not be a smart man but I know something fucked up when I see it”-Forrest gump
I heard a second one is out and really popular
“Look, you can have it right or you can have it right now.”
17:13 I believe the range was 1165 mi. not 11165 mi.
One wonders why it was not possible to just build a more powerful Dauntless.
They did. The BTD-1 Destroyer and later the A-1 Skyraider.
Because of the maximum length established
'Nail on a bigger engine' doesn't always work, or if it does it tends to result in dramatic changes to the original airframe. Merlin-engined Spitfire Mk1 to Griffon-engined Mk XIV being a case in point.
It might have gotten better over the course of production, but it never stopped being incredibly ugly.
Known as "Son of a Bitch 2nd Class" by its crews.
As per 13:00
You called? :3
I had put my comment in before watching the Video.
@@EmyrDerfel Yep, I had got it fom an Ospray book about the Helldiver when I was in my twentys in the 1980s.
Like why is the P47 Thunderbolt called the Jug, It's not Juggernaught, its Milk Jug.
They fly great in warthunder
Such a badass name for a such bad aircraft. 😞
Mr pug makes a good point. Here's the thing. There are so many aircraft that suffer the same way as the helldiver.
Even now.
The a6m zero had this, the p 47 had this. I think the f-35 is having this issue among many many others.
Weird and resicting design requirements, lack of flexibility, experience, you name it.
In time they can end up being absolute legends. Or the lessons learned from them help develop other legends.