I had the great honor of spending many hours in an Albatross as a spotter. I have flown in many aircraft, and the Albert always conveyed a sense of being rock solid and capable of handing anything. For search and rescue in the mountainous terrain of British Columbia, it went into tight spots and always came out a champ.
The PBY was a more graceful and beautiful plane as well. Pilots agreed the PBY was difficult in learning to fly, but those difficulties once mastered enhanced its' flight characteristics. Nice video.
We in the Netherlands managed a Catalina PBY for many years, which was also used for sightseeing flights. I was there 4 times and you got a water landing twice per flight and an immediate restart... that was sometimes quite intense. Very unfortunate that our Cat had to make an emergency landing on his nose because the nose wheel did not come out, a few years ago they had to sell him to the Collins Foundation in the US... very sad because we miss him immensely... I am 73 years old and they were my 2 regular outings a year as a 73-year-old widower
My best friends dad was a PBY pilot. He would share amazing stories of flying with me. He was like a second dad to me and I loved hearing his stories just before dinner time…I’d leave as soon as he was ready to eat and couldn’t wait for dinner time another day.
Great video! My dad was a radioman and gunner on the PBY(VP-53). He manned the tunnel gun (.30 cal) and used it to rake the deck of the German sub U-156 to keep the crew away from their guns and the sub was sunk. In his flight log he had one flight which lasted just over 18 hours! He would say to conserve fuel they would cut back on one engine and alternate engines every so often. Best regards, Jay
I was a passenger on an Albatross three times flying between Old Harbor and Kodiak, Alaska in the 1970's. It was the rough equivalent of a city bus up there. We flew around, not over, the mountains and took off and "landed" in the water. The memory lingers.
I have a friend who flew the Albatross in the USAF in North Africa back in the 1950's. He's 94 this year and it's great to hear him tell stories about working search and rescue in that era.
An old friend of mine told me the story of how he was among a group of friends who would fly a PBY into the Gulf of Mexico, land on the water, and fish out of the gun blisters. This would have been immediately post-war.
I had the privilege of refurbishing the G11 Albatross’s for Chalk’s airlines at Grummans St. Augustine, FL. In the 80’s. I was lucky enough to be one of the first people hired for that contract, when we got plane #1 almost finished they took us for a ride and a water landing at Crescent Lake outside of Satsuma, FL that was the smoothest landing I’ve ever had but the fisherman on the lake were pissed giving us the finger and shaking their fist at us. When we took off from the lake the prop wash from the propellers pushed out a bowl of water in the lake larger than a Volkswagen Beetle that was cool to see. I was a Navy veteran and went on the work on many different planes at several major Aerospace Companies. Also the vortex out in front of a jet engine when water was on the tarmac was neat to see watching it travel around in front of the intake. Thanks for the video brought back an old man some favorable memories.
The ironic thing was that, when WWII broke out, the PBY was considered obsolete. The British Royal Navy and RAF were desperate for aircraft, and were happy to take any PBY planes that came their way. They were superb in the roll of ASW, being large enough to fit early detection gear.
I was the radio operator on the SA-16 Albatross at Goose Bay, Labrador. 54th Air Rescue Squadron. 1955 and 56. One full year. Best experience of a lifetime. Finest aircraft I served with. We flew when it was impossible for any other type of aircraft to get off the ground. Even when GCA COULD NOT LOCATE us.
In the mid 70s to the early 80s I use to fly part time, the Albatross’s little brother, the Goose. We use to bring crew members for the off shore drilling rigs off the Gulf coast of Louisiana.
Decades ago I got typed in the Bird Innovator, Dr. Forrest Bird's four engine modified aircraft. He added two Lycoming IGSO 480's outboard of the Pratts for better on-water handling and a faster cruise speed. It was heavy, but fun! Landed it three times on the Catalina Island mountaintop strip giving underprivileged Long Beach kids rides over for buffalo burgers at the restaurant in Sunday afternoons. They, and we, loved it!
FYI, Regarding the PBY. We Canucks flew much the same plane on the North Atlantic and North Pacific during WWII. It was on the North Atlantic where they really earned their reputation, chasing subs and surface ships. We called our models Cansos after the Straight of Canso north of Newfoundland and the entrance to the St. Lawrence River. After the war, surplus aircraft were put to work on mining exploration, forest fire-fighting and passenger flights for transportation, logging and fishing companies all over Canada. Unfortunately, as a result of constant exposure to salt water, corrosion finally put an end to its amazing contribution to the war effort and then the expansion of Canadian enterprise. There is at least one in pristine condition flying around as a member of a historic group. As for the Albatross. Canada chose and flew the aircraft in the RCAF right up into the late 60s, and again surplus planes were put to work in the private and government work. All the Grumman flying boats have seen and continue to work in all types of work in Canada. We still have a good number of Grumman Goose that fly, mostly sport fishing groups or are in private hands. The Mallards were practically ripped out of our hands in order to start flying them in and around Florida. Most having been converted to turbine engines. The upside, I think, is there is enough money in that line of work to maintain them for a long, long time. I hope so. For many years, they flew passenger service out of Vancouver, BC, CYVR for West Coast Air Services. As a passenger my Father flew in them up and down our coast, visiting coastal communities as an Inspector with the provincial Fire Marshals Office. Later, after I graduated from high school, I fuelled them as an employee of the local Imperial Oil Company Aviation Division. Great aircraft.
Thank you for the comment. You make a good point in that many refer to these planes as PBY's, Catalina's, etc.... When in fact the early versions were known as "Nomads", the RCAF named their versions "Canso's". Quite a few were manufactured by Canadian Vickers with a PBV designation. Thanks for the comment and the history!
In the mid nineties, while working in SJU, I was around a PBY-5 restoration, and was around an Albatross, a few Mallards, and Gooses, some still with radials, others modified with turboprops. Some still flew with Antilles Air boats. The original PBY was not amphibious as the landing gear was detached after entering the water. Amazing airplanes.
My high school science teacher flew the PBY in WWll. His assessment was,”Nice enough handling aircraft but over reliant on the curvature of the earth to gain altitude.” It did indeed start life as a flyingboat and as with most in that era, if you wanted to move payload X over distance Y it will take power Z . With the technology available in the day that meant you needed long long runways that simply didn’t exist. Some would say the ocean was barely big enough,
I remember seeing Catalinas still flying in the early 90s. There was one carrying a banner advertisement one summer at a beach near where I lived. Amazing bird considering its beauty and that it was only made until 1945.
The Albatross did have an antisubmarine warfare role - not with the U.S., but with Norway and several other NATO countries. In that role, it carried plotting/tracking equipment, sonobuoys, MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Detection) gear, and homing torpedoes or depth charges. The cruise speed for the SA/HU-16 is understated - the manual gives it a cruise speed in the clean condition of 134 KTAS (Knots True AirSpeed), or about 157 statue MPH. The biggest difference, though, is that the Catalina wasn't designed to be able to land on the open sea - they were based out of sheltered harbors and atolls, and could be easily damaged in an open sea landing, often sinking the airplane. The Albatross is certificated for Class 6 seas - 10 foot/3m swells, 7 ft/2m waves. They could also be fitted with a reinforcing skid on the hill bottom, and outrigger skis on the wing floats to allow them to land and take off from snow and ice. The USAF also used SA-16s for Special Operations - covert insertion and extraction of agents or downed aircrew behind the Iron Curtain in the 1950s - although, with that pair of 9 cylinder Wright Cyclones clattering away, one has to wonder how covert that was - you could hear one coming for miles/minutes.
Thanks for that, I was scratching my head at the stated cruise speed given here. For take off on open water the HU-16 required JATO packs in most seas, which for some unknown reason (🤭) were never certified for civilian use. I had thought (dunno if assumption or badly informed) that the Cat was fine for open water landing given it’s SAR role.
not going to lie, felt like reading wikipedia article on the two planes. Maybe have a tour of the interiors? show a floor plan? talk about features, dig up some stories of things the crews liked and disliked about them in action?
Things I've read: there was a window on the PBY near the propellers. During flight, one crewman stuck his hand out and was injured. While receiving first aid, he was asked what happened. He stuck his other hand out and demonstrated.... I heard they kept lots of pencils on a PBY. These were used to jamb into bullet holes to keep the water out (must have been small caliber). I suspect these were just tall tales.
The PBY loses about 5 or 6 feet of span when she has the floats lowered. On one occasion an Albatross put down on the water in the arctic sircle and the props froze in reverse pitch and they had to taxi backwards into warmer air to get airborne again.
And the Winner is ,,, the pbM, a very long career, sank subs and most importantly to a pilot it could land in much higher waves, I wish there was more out there on it. Very nice video thanks for taking the time to do this.
Wanted to see this comparison . You have enthusiasm. Have RC controlled Cat. and Grumpy. Same scale 6o odd inch. Look fwd. to next installation. Thanks all. Dave
Not that I could ever afford one, but the Albatross has always been my favorite aircraft. Can't say why, but I've always been drawn to it. It was super cool to see one in person up at the air museum near March AFB.
I went to northern New York State . A friend of mine purchased a single engine float plan with a 180 degree door to access men from. The plane was never used in the Second World War. The plane was in peace’s. We were going to take it a part and redo everything. He had an accident and broke his neck before he had everything in place. He was building a house and hanger at Massey air park. The airplane was moved to winter haven airport to work on and sale. He had faa approval to fly when working. He had panel layout for all new gauges ready. He had purchased a engine to replace its engine. Everything was coming together until the accident.
This one had a place for a medic and a person on a stretcher. It engine was a pusher three blade unit. A person had to climb into the nose had a hatch to anchor off shore. It had minor damage from limb hitting the wing in a storm in Canada.
I recall talking to folks who had flown the PBY, and they said it had to be constantly "flown", meaning constant physical control inputs to keep it in straight and level flight.
The range on these aircraft are astonishing. ... i think the design is fantastic and i cant see why nobody makes aircraft like that anymore. A few modern upgrades and they would still be viable.
What's in a name? A lot ! "PBY stands for Patrol Bomber, and the Y stands for Consolidated. The original U.S. Navy designation for the Grumman Albatross was JR2F, JR stands for utility transport, the 2 means the second of this type from this manufacturer, and the F stands for Grumman. So, right from the U.S. Navy designations of the two planes the difference in their intended mission is obvious.
The albatross was also used for infiltration and exfiltration. Some were fitted with the All-American System (Skyhook Extraction System) featured in the opening of the "Thunderball" Bond film.
I appreciate your informative video on the PBY, one of my favorites. Had to laugh at your comment that the PBY's crew could be anywhere between nine and ten crewmen. Where exactly is anywhere between nine and ten?
Would you be able to compare the Catalina to the Kawanishi H8K? I was comparing different categories of WWII planes. Like if I was in charge of a major country in WWII and I had to pick one design for a class of aircraft which would I pick? For flying boat it seems the only plane that could compare to the Catalina is the Kawanishi H8K.
@@gj1234567899999 I was actually thinking about that very subject. I've been reading a lot of pacific submarine historical fiction, some by Craig DiLouie, and in almost every book there is a situation where US subs were attacked by a Kawanishi. I'll happily dig into this for you!
I did not realize that the Albatross was in production until 1961. That was the same year I first saw an SA-16 up close, at Wheelus AFB in Libya. As I remember, there were couple of them stationed there for ASR duties. I once watched one take off from the water there, but they normally used the runway to come and go.
More times than I could count I wished I could have been in the PBY Catalina Navy. But don't get me wrong. 1972-1976 US Navy, USS Ranger CV-61 was good duty.
I liked your presentation, but I’d like to make a minor correction and provide some additional info on the Albatross… Speed is wrong, the Albatross cruised at 140kt (30” 2000rpm). It still holds records for speed, range, altitude. The interior was huge compared to the Cat and the Albatross had a big hatch in the top of the fuselage. You could haul any part of the airplane except for the outer wing panels and the fuselage, so you could rescue another Albatross. There was a trifibian version that had ski attachments on the belly and float tanks. The Goat (Albatross) was very easy to fly but I cannot compare with the Cat being I don’t have time in one. The Albatross had 300 gallon drop tanks using standard bomb racks, so it is feasible to hang some bombs. The Albatross had Wright R-1820 single row 9 cylinder engines rated at 1425 hp for takeoff (51.5” 2700rpm) The Albatross was used by the Coast Guard, Air Force, Navy, CIA, and others.
I think theres a conversion that you can be done, where you replace the P&W 1830 engines on the PBY with a pair of Wright R-2600's, it's said to really wake the PBY up.
I LOVE ELABORATE, METICULOUS INFORMATION LIKE THIS!!!!!! I would love to see a follow up video on how many are still surviving airworthy today, how many performed as waterbombers, etc.
I wish you would have started with range, speed, cruise, and Take off weight. And then compared durability and service requirements from histories in contemporary times.
New subscriber and old pilot here. Excellent review and video. I got a chance to experience water takeoffs, flight and landings in the Albatross back in the 80's with Chalks from Miami to Nassau, Bahamas and back. Would you consider doing a review of the civilian conversions of the military Lockheed Ventures including the Learstar, Loadstar and especially the Howard 500 by Dee Howard. How about the civilian conversions of the A-26 by On Mark and others. They always impressed me when they were in use back in the 60's. Thanks
I'd be happy to investigate these civilian versions for you! I'll begin talking to some of my contacts with the Commemorative Air Force. There are a lot of experienced pilots that may have the answers you're looking for.
@@HistoryX Thanks for your attention and reply. The Howard 500 and A-26 On Mark conversions were favored by corporate executives back in the 50's and 60's when there were few to no business jets. The Lockheed Jetstar and later the Gulfstream II would out perform them but the first generations of smsller business jets came up short on any trips over 1000 nm. They could operate from short fields and their costs were a fraction of any alternatives.
Thanks for this very interesting. My uncle was a navy pilot and he flew the Consolidated PB2Y Coronado near the end/after WW2. The Coronado was a four engine version. At first I thought he flew the Catalina but I have a picture of him and his crew in front of a Coronado. Perhaps he did time in both... I don't know. He did participate in the Bikini Island nuclear test. I assume ferrying parts, personnel, etc.. His aircraft in the picture had V6 stenciled on it which I assume stood for the VR-6 Navy Transport Squadron.
Learn from history or repeat it. These types of Aircraft are not obsolete in today’s modern Navy Marines or Air Force or Coast Guard they can serve a essential role in both offense defense and search and rescue missions and coastal security.
They handle very different on the water. Albatross is more stable, but needs deeper water. Nose landing gear doors are designed differently. PBY doors can open and the nose will end up under the wing. Albatross forces them closed.
Great aircraft! There are rumors about a new future for a modernized version of the PBY Catalina for military service. Composite materials for the airframe, turboprop engines and modern electronics. Missions can incline SAR, ELINT, ASW, COD, as well as more convert missions, also drone control and resupply missions. Naturally the modernized version will be manufactured by a different company. So we will see what happens. It could be "pie in the sky." Yet there is no question that the Navy needs a new plane like these, for missions that helicopters are too slow, too short ranged for. Among the Pacific oceans many island chains.
If you consider when the PBY was designed and built in the 30's, it truly is a remarkable aircraft. Also, it's ability to be a multi-roll aircraft just adds to it's importance as a much needed asset during WWII. Other than maybe being "prettier" and having a slightly longer range, the Albatross is a little underwhelming considering it was built post WWII.
How about take off performance comparisons? I've watched an Albatross come and go from Lake Union in Seattle and I've seen a PBY try to land. The PBY waved off due to low visibility.
The Albatross have flaps, reverse capability where as the Catalina does not. Catalina engines are 1200 hp compared to the Albatross at 1425 hp. The Catalina I used to work on and fly used to land on Lake Union in the late 80's prior to my friend owning it about 1990 to 1993 in northern California.
While the PBY is definitely the more iconic and I guess sexier of the two the Albatross is far more comfortable and accommodating. Just ask Jimmy Buffet. Still, if you were going to make a flying RV wouldn't you really want to have those cool ass blisters?
My grandfather was a radio operator and side gunner on a PBM. His crew is somewhat famous for discovering the typhoon that nearly sunk the fleet. I could be wrong, but to my mind, it seems that the Martins would be a better comparison for to Grumman or that at least they should have been included.
So the PBY Catalina was way more mission flexible, and war capable, especially with long range sub attack capability, than the rescue-only Albatross. The PBY was equally capable for search and rescue when flying without gunners like the Albatross. Both had near identical range, and cruising speeds. The only advantage is the 20% higher top speed of the Albatross. It makes one wonder if it was really worth the program cost to design and produce 466 Albatross's rather than to keep the existing post-war PBY inventory and continue low rate replacement PBY production. But I'm sure there must be more to this story that favors the Albatross.
I am sure the Albatorss could have been fitted with various weapon systems if there had been a need or if it had been available for service in WW2. Still surprising that the seem to have very close performance and specs considering how much newer the Albatross was.
After the war ended the US couldn't mothball and then scrap its armaments fast enough, especially ships and planes. I'm sure the surviving PBYs were included in those scrap piles. Secondly, the Catalina was a Navy plane and the Grumman had Air Force markings so it was built to a different set of specifications. Third, by the 1950's into the '60's the helicopter had supplanted the seaplane for search and rescue missions. On appearances and performance I would give the edge to the Catalina as well. What is not addressed here are the flying characteristics and reliability of the 2 planes: which was easier to handle in flight and which one required more maintenance to keep it flying. I think the determining factor lies in those answers.
I believe the PBY is the aircraft that spotted the Japanese fleet before the Battle of Midway. It gave our fellows a great advantage.
And a PBY spotted the Bismark before the final fatal attack by the Royal Navy.
I had the great honor of spending many hours in an Albatross as a spotter. I have flown in many aircraft, and the Albert always conveyed a sense of being rock solid and capable of handing anything. For search and rescue in the mountainous terrain of British Columbia, it went into tight spots and always came out a champ.
Loving it!
The PBY was a more graceful and beautiful plane as well. Pilots agreed the PBY was difficult in learning to fly, but those difficulties once mastered enhanced its' flight characteristics. Nice video.
We in the Netherlands managed a Catalina PBY for many years, which was also used for sightseeing flights. I was there 4 times and you got a water landing twice per flight and an immediate restart... that was sometimes quite intense.
Very unfortunate that our Cat had to make an emergency landing on his nose because the nose wheel did not come out, a few years ago they had to sell him to the Collins Foundation in the US... very sad because we miss him immensely... I am 73 years old and they were my 2 regular outings a year as a 73-year-old widower
My best friends dad was a PBY pilot. He would share amazing stories of flying with me. He was like a second dad to me and I loved hearing his stories just before dinner time…I’d leave as soon as he was ready to eat and couldn’t wait for dinner time another day.
Great video! My dad was a radioman and gunner on the PBY(VP-53). He manned the tunnel gun (.30 cal) and used it to rake the deck of the German sub U-156 to keep the crew away from their guns and the sub was sunk. In his flight log he had one flight which lasted just over 18 hours! He would say to conserve fuel they would cut back on one engine and alternate engines every so often. Best regards, Jay
Thank you for the comment, Jay. Glad to see you liked the video!
That was more like a common sortie duration. Most crews considered anything under 12-14 short.
Wow! Your dad would be fun to talk to.
So vp went from catalina to the P3 to the P8??
I was a passenger on an Albatross three times flying between Old Harbor and Kodiak, Alaska in the 1970's. It was the rough equivalent of a city bus up there. We flew around, not over, the mountains and took off and "landed" in the water. The memory lingers.
I have a friend who flew the Albatross in the USAF in North Africa back in the 1950's. He's 94 this year and it's great to hear him tell stories about working search and rescue in that era.
Thanks for sharing 👍
An old friend of mine told me the story of how he was among a group of friends who would fly a PBY into the Gulf of Mexico, land on the water, and fish out of the gun blisters. This would have been immediately post-war.
I had the privilege of refurbishing the G11 Albatross’s for Chalk’s airlines at Grummans St. Augustine, FL. In the 80’s. I was lucky enough to be one of the first people hired for that contract, when we got plane #1 almost finished they took us for a ride and a water landing at Crescent Lake outside of Satsuma, FL that was the smoothest landing I’ve ever had but the fisherman on the lake were pissed giving us the finger and shaking their fist at us. When we took off from the lake the prop wash from the propellers pushed out a bowl of water in the lake larger than a Volkswagen Beetle that was cool to see. I was a Navy veteran and went on the work on many different planes at several major Aerospace Companies. Also the vortex out in front of a jet engine when water was on the tarmac was neat to see watching it travel around in front of the intake. Thanks for the video brought back an old man some favorable memories.
PBY still my fav!
Your next plane!
Strawberry 5!
The PBY was a war bird, designed for the "what if". The Albatross was a rescue bird, designed around the lessons learned from war experience.
The ironic thing was that, when WWII broke out, the PBY was considered obsolete. The British Royal Navy and RAF were desperate for aircraft, and were happy to take any PBY planes that came their way.
They were superb in the roll of ASW, being large enough to fit early detection gear.
I was the radio operator on the SA-16 Albatross at Goose Bay, Labrador. 54th Air Rescue Squadron. 1955 and 56. One full year. Best experience of a lifetime. Finest aircraft I served with. We flew when it was impossible for any other type of aircraft to get off the ground. Even when GCA COULD NOT LOCATE us.
To summarize, completely different aircraft designed for completely different rolls, but vaguely similar in size and shape.
The PBY and the Grumman F6F Hellcat we’re my 2 favorite aircraft from WWII. I would love to go for a ride in a PBY someday.
In the mid 70s to the early 80s I use to fly part time, the Albatross’s little brother, the Goose. We use to bring crew members for the off shore drilling rigs off the Gulf coast of Louisiana.
My father was in the Navy as a radio operator and flew in several planes, but never got to fly in his favorite, the PBY. 😊
Thank you for taking the time to compile the information. I enjoyed the video.
Always been a PBY fan.
Decades ago I got typed in the Bird Innovator, Dr. Forrest Bird's four engine modified aircraft.
He added two Lycoming IGSO 480's outboard of the Pratts for better on-water handling and a faster cruise speed.
It was heavy, but fun!
Landed it three times on the Catalina Island mountaintop strip giving underprivileged Long Beach kids rides over for buffalo burgers at the restaurant in Sunday afternoons.
They, and we, loved it!
FYI, Regarding the PBY. We Canucks flew much the same plane on the North Atlantic and North Pacific during WWII. It was on the North Atlantic where they really earned their reputation, chasing subs and surface ships. We called our models Cansos after the Straight of Canso north of Newfoundland and the entrance to the St. Lawrence River. After the war, surplus aircraft were put to work on mining exploration, forest fire-fighting and passenger flights for transportation, logging and fishing companies all over Canada. Unfortunately, as a result of constant exposure to salt water, corrosion finally put an end to its amazing contribution to the war effort and then the expansion of Canadian enterprise. There is at least one in pristine condition flying around as a member of a historic group. As for the Albatross. Canada chose and flew the aircraft in the RCAF right up into the late 60s, and again surplus planes were put to work in the private and government work. All the Grumman flying boats have seen and continue to work in all types of work in Canada. We still have a good number of Grumman Goose that fly, mostly sport fishing groups or are in private hands. The Mallards were practically ripped out of our hands in order to start flying them in and around Florida. Most having been converted to turbine engines. The upside, I think, is there is enough money in that line of work to maintain them for a long, long time. I hope so. For many years, they flew passenger service out of Vancouver, BC, CYVR for West Coast Air Services. As a passenger my Father flew in them up and down our coast, visiting coastal communities as an Inspector with the provincial Fire Marshals Office. Later, after I graduated from high school, I fuelled them as an employee of the local Imperial Oil Company Aviation Division. Great aircraft.
Thank you for the comment. You make a good point in that many refer to these planes as PBY's, Catalina's, etc.... When in fact the early versions were known as "Nomads", the RCAF named their versions "Canso's". Quite a few were manufactured by Canadian Vickers with a PBV designation. Thanks for the comment and the history!
In the mid nineties, while working in SJU, I was around a PBY-5 restoration, and was around an Albatross, a few Mallards, and Gooses, some still with radials, others modified with turboprops. Some still flew with Antilles Air boats. The original PBY was not amphibious as the landing gear was detached after entering the water. Amazing airplanes.
My high school science teacher flew the PBY in WWll. His assessment was,”Nice enough handling aircraft but over reliant on the curvature of the earth to gain altitude.” It did indeed start life as a flyingboat and as with most in that era, if you wanted to move payload X over distance Y it will take power Z . With the technology available in the day that meant you needed long long runways that simply didn’t exist. Some would say the ocean was barely big enough,
Great video. Thanks very much. Greetings from Mexico City
Nice!... we have a Catalina here in NZ... thanks from down under👍🇳🇿
I remember seeing Catalinas still flying in the early 90s. There was one carrying a banner advertisement one summer at a beach near where I lived. Amazing bird considering its beauty and that it was only made until 1945.
The Albatross did have an antisubmarine warfare role - not with the U.S., but with Norway and several other NATO countries. In that role, it carried plotting/tracking equipment, sonobuoys, MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Detection) gear, and homing torpedoes or depth charges.
The cruise speed for the SA/HU-16 is understated - the manual gives it a cruise speed in the clean condition of 134 KTAS (Knots True AirSpeed), or about 157 statue MPH.
The biggest difference, though, is that the Catalina wasn't designed to be able to land on the open sea - they were based out of sheltered harbors and atolls, and could be easily damaged in an open sea landing, often sinking the airplane. The Albatross is certificated for Class 6 seas - 10 foot/3m swells, 7 ft/2m waves. They could also be fitted with a reinforcing skid on the hill bottom, and outrigger skis on the wing floats to allow them to land and take off from snow and ice.
The USAF also used SA-16s for Special Operations - covert insertion and extraction of agents or downed aircrew behind the Iron Curtain in the 1950s - although, with that pair of 9 cylinder Wright Cyclones clattering away, one has to wonder how covert that was - you could hear one coming for miles/minutes.
shut up you idiot.
Dont be lazy.
Read a book.
Thanks for that, I was scratching my head at the stated cruise speed given here.
For take off on open water the HU-16 required JATO packs in most seas, which for some unknown reason (🤭) were never certified for civilian use. I had thought (dunno if assumption or badly informed) that the Cat was fine for open water landing given it’s SAR role.
not going to lie, felt like reading wikipedia article on the two planes. Maybe have a tour of the interiors? show a floor plan? talk about features, dig up some stories of things the crews liked and disliked about them in action?
I work from home. It was nice to just listen while I work.
Things I've read: there was a window on the PBY near the propellers. During flight, one crewman stuck his hand out and was injured. While receiving first aid, he was asked what happened. He stuck his other hand out and demonstrated....
I heard they kept lots of pencils on a PBY. These were used to jamb into bullet holes to keep the water out (must have been small caliber).
I suspect these were just tall tales.
Yesterday I went inside the b-17 and the pby. They’re the best ww2 planes and should still be in use today.
The PBY loses about 5 or 6 feet of span when she has the floats lowered. On one occasion an Albatross put down on the water in the arctic sircle and the props froze in reverse pitch and they had to taxi backwards into warmer air to get airborne again.
And the Winner is ,,, the pbM, a very long career, sank subs and most importantly to a pilot it could land in much higher waves, I wish there was more out there on it. Very nice video thanks for taking the time to do this.
Wanted to see this comparison . You have enthusiasm. Have RC controlled Cat. and Grumpy. Same scale 6o odd inch. Look fwd. to next installation. Thanks all. Dave
I have good memories of helping around that PBY hull
Crewed in Goats in the Coast Guard, loved that aircraft!
Appreciate these sort of detailed videos that help us to understand details like this, subscribed.
Awesome, thank you!
Not that I could ever afford one, but the Albatross has always been my favorite aircraft. Can't say why, but I've always been drawn to it. It was super cool to see one in person up at the air museum near March AFB.
I went to northern New York State . A friend of mine purchased a single engine float plan with a 180 degree door to access men from. The plane was never used in the Second World War. The plane was in peace’s. We were going to take it a part and redo everything. He had an accident and broke his neck before he had everything in place. He was building a house and hanger at Massey air park. The airplane was moved to winter haven airport to work on and sale. He had faa approval to fly when working. He had panel layout for all new gauges ready. He had purchased a engine to replace its engine. Everything was coming together until the accident.
This one had a place for a medic and a person on a stretcher. It engine was a pusher three blade unit. A person had to climb into the nose had a hatch to anchor off shore. It had minor damage from limb hitting the wing in a storm in Canada.
I recall talking to folks who had flown the PBY, and they said it had to be constantly "flown", meaning constant physical control inputs to keep it in straight and level flight.
Great presentation, thank you sir!
Thanks again Ken!
@HistoryX >>> Great video...👍
The range on these aircraft are astonishing. ... i think the design is fantastic and i cant see why nobody makes aircraft like that anymore. A few modern upgrades and they would still be viable.
What's in a name? A lot ! "PBY stands for Patrol Bomber, and the Y stands for Consolidated. The original U.S. Navy designation for the Grumman Albatross was JR2F, JR stands for utility transport, the 2 means the second of this type from this manufacturer, and the F stands for Grumman. So, right from the U.S. Navy designations of the two planes the difference in their intended mission is obvious.
The albatross was also used for infiltration and exfiltration. Some were fitted with the All-American System (Skyhook Extraction System) featured in the opening of the "Thunderball" Bond film.
At the end, not the opening.
Especially now the Catalina is getting a refresh updated modern-day version 👍
I appreciate your informative video on the PBY, one of my favorites. Had to laugh at your comment that the PBY's crew could be anywhere between nine and ten crewmen. Where exactly is anywhere between nine and ten?
Wow I was just thinking about this question. TH-cam has everything!
Thanks for the comment, Jg! We made this one just for you! Hope you'll consider subscribing!
Would you be able to compare the Catalina to the Kawanishi H8K? I was comparing different categories of WWII planes. Like if I was in charge of a major country in WWII and I had to pick one design for a class of aircraft which would I pick? For flying boat it seems the only plane that could compare to the Catalina is the Kawanishi H8K.
@@gj1234567899999 I was actually thinking about that very subject. I've been reading a lot of pacific submarine historical fiction, some by Craig DiLouie, and in almost every book there is a situation where US subs were attacked by a Kawanishi. I'll happily dig into this for you!
I did not realize that the Albatross was in production until 1961. That was the same year I first saw an SA-16 up close, at Wheelus AFB in Libya. As I remember, there were couple of them stationed there for ASR duties. I once watched one take off from the water there, but they normally used the runway to come and go.
The Catalina is definitely among the most beautiful airplanes ever designed.
Thanks for the interesting information
Thank you for your comment, Don. Much appreciated!
good video
I was a flight mechanic on the hu16 in the usaf made a sea pick up of a downed navy pilot in Vietnam 1966
That's some serious history you've got there! Must've been quite an intense experience!
"Anywhere between nine and ten...?" Our little misstatements can spice things up with humor.
More times than I could count I wished I could have been in the PBY Catalina Navy. But don't get me wrong. 1972-1976 US Navy, USS Ranger CV-61 was good duty.
Thank you for your service swab. 😁
Interesting, thank you! A good film with PBYs in it is called, South Pacific. I never watched a film with an Albatross, lol.
I’d love owning either!
My dad flew in a #PBY and a #PBM. My Dad said both aircraft could stay in the air for 24 hours
I liked your presentation, but I’d like to make a minor correction and provide some additional info on the Albatross…
Speed is wrong, the Albatross cruised at 140kt (30” 2000rpm). It still holds records for speed, range, altitude. The interior was huge compared to the Cat and the Albatross had a big hatch in the top of the fuselage. You could haul any part of the airplane except for the outer wing panels and the fuselage, so you could rescue another Albatross. There was a trifibian version that had ski attachments on the belly and float tanks. The Goat (Albatross) was very easy to fly but I cannot compare with the Cat being I don’t have time in one. The Albatross had 300 gallon drop tanks using standard bomb racks, so it is feasible to hang some bombs. The Albatross had Wright R-1820 single row 9 cylinder engines rated at 1425 hp for takeoff (51.5” 2700rpm)
The Albatross was used by the Coast Guard, Air Force, Navy, CIA, and others.
Thanks for the comment, Willy. I appreciate the additional information!
I think theres a conversion that you can be done, where you replace the P&W 1830 engines on the PBY with a pair of Wright R-2600's, it's said to really wake the PBY up.
Both planes are very cool but there's just something about the PBY teardrop dome windows that make it more interesting to me.
My father flew on the SA-16 Albatross in France (1953) and Germany (1953-55).
I will take the UH-16 as I had access to one . It's made like a tank , good range and speed .
If I have this correctly, Jimmy Buffett carried a boston whaler inside the albatross. That is the one metric that really matters to my dreams ;)
The Albatros is featured in a classic movie, " Flight From Ashiya ".
I LOVE ELABORATE, METICULOUS INFORMATION LIKE THIS!!!!!!
I would love to see a follow up video on how many are still surviving airworthy today, how many performed as waterbombers, etc.
I wish you would have started with range, speed, cruise, and Take off weight. And then compared durability and service requirements from histories in contemporary times.
That is a great idea for a video. Compare it to present-day designs. Thanks!!!
@@HistoryX
Love the channel ❤
The flying boats are a favorite and I really appreciate your work.
Regards
You should include the albatross A model which had a wingspan of 80’. And the cruising speed of 150 knots.
I've got only one question... How can you have "between 9 and 10 aircrew?"
Right, the radio operator, etc...doubled as gunner. My dad was assigned to the PBY in WWII.
The radio operator and other crew also doubled as gunners. My father was assigned to the PBY in WWII.
@@TheGravitywerks Yeah, I get that... but the question still remains -- the only "between" is a fraction of a man (like 9.5)... See what I mean?
Good question. As I understand it, not all of the PBY's had radar installed and therefore that 10th crew member was not always required.
@@KiggenG 9 men and a boy
For sake, at the very few split of a second i thought Andre Agassi is talking about that. I really had to look twice!
WWII was unlimited war.
We haven't done that in a while, but you can see the difference between peacetime (Albatross) and wartime, Catalina.
Good evening from SE Louisiana 15 Oct 21.
New subscriber and old pilot here. Excellent review and video. I got a chance to experience water takeoffs, flight and landings in the Albatross back in the 80's with Chalks from Miami to Nassau, Bahamas and back. Would you consider doing a review of the civilian conversions of the military Lockheed Ventures including the Learstar, Loadstar and especially the Howard 500 by Dee Howard. How about the civilian conversions of the A-26 by On Mark and others. They always impressed me when they were in use back in the 60's. Thanks
I'd be happy to investigate these civilian versions for you! I'll begin talking to some of my contacts with the Commemorative Air Force. There are a lot of experienced pilots that may have the answers you're looking for.
@@HistoryX Thanks for your attention and reply. The Howard 500 and A-26 On Mark conversions were favored by corporate executives back in the 50's and 60's when there were few to no business jets. The Lockheed Jetstar and later the Gulfstream II would out perform them but the first generations of smsller business jets came up short on any trips over 1000 nm. They could operate from short fields and their costs were a fraction of any alternatives.
I would take the PBY, install flaps, leading edge slats and try to install turbo props on it.
Thanks for this very interesting. My uncle was a navy pilot and he flew the Consolidated PB2Y Coronado near the end/after WW2. The Coronado was a four engine version. At first I thought he flew the Catalina but I have a picture of him and his crew in front of a Coronado. Perhaps he did time in both... I don't know. He did participate in the Bikini Island nuclear test. I assume ferrying parts, personnel, etc.. His aircraft in the picture had V6 stenciled on it which I assume stood for the VR-6 Navy Transport Squadron.
I don't know if they are still there, about 6 or 7 years ago there was a Cat and 2 Albatross parked and rotting away at the air strip in Globe Ariz.
According to Google Maps street view there is still an Albatross there with a missing engine.
@@Grygus_Triss Cool,
I wonder wat happened to the other A/C?
Right On
Learn from history or repeat it. These types of Aircraft are not obsolete in today’s modern Navy Marines or Air Force or Coast Guard they can serve a essential role in both offense defense and search and rescue missions and coastal security.
Seems like the better comparison would have been between the Consolidated PBY Catalina and the Martin PBM Mariner.
Interesting... The PBY got moved North from St Paul?? Another thing about Albatross, I would think was it was a successor to the legendary Goose...
What was the difference in what sea conditions each could handle ie wave height
Did CATS have the same engines as the B 24? What type of engines did the Albatross have?
Pbm vs pby, what's the differences?
PBM=Patrol Bomber, Martin. PBY=Patrol Bomber, Consolidated. Completely different airplanes from different manufacturers
They handle very different on the water. Albatross is more stable, but needs deeper water. Nose landing gear doors are designed differently. PBY doors can open and the nose will end up under the wing. Albatross forces them closed.
Great aircraft! There are rumors about a new future for a modernized version of the PBY Catalina for military service. Composite materials for the airframe, turboprop engines and modern electronics. Missions can incline SAR, ELINT, ASW, COD, as well as more convert missions, also drone control and resupply missions. Naturally the modernized version will be manufactured by a different company. So we will see what happens. It could be "pie in the sky." Yet there is no question that the Navy needs a new plane like these, for missions that helicopters are too slow, too short ranged for. Among the Pacific oceans many island chains.
Which plane had more interior volume?
If you consider when the PBY was designed and built in the 30's, it truly is a remarkable aircraft. Also, it's ability to be a multi-roll aircraft just adds to it's importance as a much needed asset during WWII. Other than maybe being "prettier" and having a slightly longer range, the Albatross is a little underwhelming considering it was built post WWII.
Pretty is in the eye of the beholder, The PBY is much prettier IMHO.
Lets compare a 1930 Studebaker pickup to a 1950 (Ford, Chevy, Dodge) pickup.
I'm surprised Grumman won a contract to replace the PBY. Did Consolidated have a plane competing against Grumman back in the late 40's?
Martin was the main competition.
These planes come from two different eras, Pre war PBY and post war Albatross.
I know the Albatross well. I have 2,500 pilot hours in her.
How about take off performance comparisons? I've watched an Albatross come and go from Lake Union in Seattle and I've seen a PBY try to land. The PBY waved off due to low visibility.
The Albatross have flaps, reverse capability where as the Catalina does not. Catalina engines are 1200 hp compared to the Albatross at 1425 hp. The Catalina I used to work on and fly used to land on Lake Union in the late 80's prior to my friend owning it about 1990 to 1993 in northern California.
While the PBY is definitely the more iconic and I guess sexier of the two the Albatross is far more comfortable and accommodating. Just ask Jimmy Buffet. Still, if you were going to make a flying RV wouldn't you really want to have those cool ass blisters?
Give Me the PBY-5A Catalina, Wish I Had One as Flying RV.
How about the PBM?
My grandfather was a radio operator and side gunner on a PBM. His crew is somewhat famous for discovering the typhoon that nearly sunk the fleet. I could be wrong, but to my mind, it seems that the Martins would be a better comparison for to Grumman or that at least they should have been included.
You are incorrect on the cruise speed of the Albatross which is 157KTS.
I have both of these in the rc sense. The albatross is my favorite but both fly like giant trainers.
So the PBY Catalina was way more mission flexible, and war capable, especially with long range sub attack capability, than the rescue-only Albatross. The PBY was equally capable for search and rescue when flying without gunners like the Albatross. Both had near identical range, and cruising speeds. The only advantage is the 20% higher top speed of the Albatross. It makes one wonder if it was really worth the program cost to design and produce 466 Albatross's rather than to keep the existing post-war PBY inventory and continue low rate replacement PBY production. But I'm sure there must be more to this story that favors the Albatross.
I am sure the Albatorss could have been fitted with various weapon systems if there had been a need or if it had been available for service in WW2. Still surprising that the seem to have very close performance and specs considering how much newer the Albatross was.
After the war ended the US couldn't mothball and then scrap its armaments fast enough, especially ships and planes. I'm sure the surviving PBYs were included in those scrap piles. Secondly, the Catalina was a Navy plane and the Grumman had Air Force markings so it was built to a different set of specifications. Third, by the 1950's into the '60's the helicopter had supplanted the seaplane for search and rescue missions. On appearances and performance I would give the edge to the Catalina as well. What is not addressed here are the flying characteristics and reliability of the 2 planes: which was easier to handle in flight and which one required more maintenance to keep it flying. I think the determining factor lies in those answers.
I Liked the PBY-5A Catalina, More.
The PBY is sexy and the albatross is just cool. That's the real difference
This is a great comment!!! The PBY just has something about it, especially when you are near one.