The Consolidated TBY Sea Wolf - A “When Good Enough Beats Better(?)” Case Study

[@mpersad]

Whilst I can see the advantages of a "greenhouse" canopy for recon etc it just looks really awkward and vulnerable. I had no idea that the USN considered it so highly, or indeed that it existed as a type! Top work as usual Ed, thanks for a great video.

[@mikepette4422]

awkward yes but vulnerable definitely

[@duytranuc4025]

in combat spotter/radio operator will crawl to belly tail gun, and pilot still have armored seat, only radio stay in that "greenhouse" canopy

[@duytranuc4025]

and if plane land on sea, that canopy is the only way radio operator can get out, other door is under waterline

[@Metal_Auditor]

@@duytranuc4025 right, and it's not like the fuselage is that much better than glass at stopping bullets.

[@trooperdgb9722]

Why vulnerable? The fuselage structure wouldn't stop a bullet either! LOL

[@jamesricker3997]

The Avenger was a more compact design. A very important feature when dealing with limited storage space in aircraft carriers

[@Itsjustme-Justme]

more compact but still huge ....

[@rogertycholiz2218]

@@Itsjustme-Justme - Avenger was a much better aircraft in comparison to it's huge ugly overweight brother.

[@lafeelabriel]

And the Avenger itself isn't exactly a small aircraft.

[@ralphe5842]

The avenger was actually longer the wingspan was a a few feet shorter the max speed for the avenger was 275 mph while the seawolf was 312 mph

[@ralphe5842]

@@rogertycholiz2218they weighed about the same and the Avenger was longer

[@kevinludlow7561]

It seemed to offer great all-round vision, i.e. because it rather looked like a flying greenhouse! Another great post on forgotten, optimistic and at times eccentric aircraft, thank you

[@janwitts2688]

A bit like the albacore over the swordfish.. but they had issues with refraction on all that glass. ..

[@sheeplord4976]

There are a way too many reinforcing bars. Sounds great on paper, but awful in practice.

[@terrysmith7751]

The TBY was built by Consolidated in Allentown, PA. After the war the factory's airstrip was converted to a general aviation airfield, and planes from it fly over my house every day. I enjoy it.

[@kimraudenbush615]

The general aviation airfield is named Queen City Airport, and is not far from the Mack Trucks Testing Facility.

[@neilfoster814]

Interesting to hear about the "Go in to land" lever, very useful on a plane during stressful carrier landings.

[@hancock63]

Excellent video. I live a couple of miles from where the Sea Wolf was built. I always thought it was a real shame that all examples of this aircraft were scrapped. At least one should have been preserved in a museum.

[@kiwisteve6598]

Thanks for another excellent video on a plane I had never heard of. I could see that canopy being a real plus on long Pacific patrols, the crew could grow their own salad in flight.

[@notreallydavid]

Say goodbye to the misery of scurvy.

[@kellybreen5526]

It looks delicate next to the Avenger and the wings position remind me of the Barracuda. The multi seat torpedo bomber and dive bomber was replaced by the single seat fighter bomber. Had the war continued I suspect there would have been less dedicated bombers and more F4U's, Seafuries Firebrands and Skyraiders.

[@jamesmaclennan4525]

Indeed it looks the offspring of a Barracuda and a Skua

[@fooman2108]

When they let the contract to Grumman all but One type on USN flight decks were Grumman's. Grumman has (still does) have a reputation for enormous toughness (hence the nickname of the Bethpaige (Long Island) boiler works) legend has that if you manage to BREAK a Grumman aircraft you have achieved something.

[@TINCANsquid]

Grumman Iron Works

[@fooman2108]

My dad has 18 years flying stoofs, and C-1's like I said if you can break one that is and achievement (without killing yourself doing it). As a kid I can recall watching them shooting landings at NAS North Island in the ICE PLANT to simulate slippery conditions

[@donjones4719]

Has the advantage of similar Grumman parts for the logistics pipeline, I imagine. Plus if a mechanic is trained to work on one Grumman he can probably be easily trained to work on the next.

[@robertdendooven7258]

@@donjones4719 There has been no information that any more than a few parts were interchangeable between the TBF/M and F4F or F6F. The main common parts were probably part of the wing folding mechanism that were on all three aircraft.

[@dukecraig2402]

Grumman Ironworks, not boilerworks, and it was because of Grumman's reputation for building landing gear strong enough to withstand carrier service that they were selected to build the LEM for the Apollo program.

[@randyjennings3075]

Ed, as air crew on the TBM-3E Avenger "Doris Mae" CAF Capital Wing, thanks so much for researching this. What if the Avenger was not the backbone of the Marine/Navy Torpedo/bomber fleet? Who knows? As our Maintenance Officer says, "She's fat and slow, but we love her so." The TBM's line's are not beautiful, unless you love her, but she: delivered iron on target, handles like a dream, hauled the mail, flew eight hour missions, and oh yeh could land on Jeep carriers. Impressive piece of metal that she is.

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

I love the Avenger, I'll admit.

[@jamesricker3997]

Nothing would have changed, the Mk 13 torpedo did not work, over a 90% failure rate.They didn't get the bugs out until 1944 The Japanese should have given a medal to the people who recommended its adoption

[@johnwriter8234]

My father was radio/gunner in USN TBM Avenger

[@dingo8babym20]

@@jamesricker3997 That, and the horrible attrition rate during an attempted attack was one of the reasons they largely abandoned torpedo runs. My father's logbook indicates 100% 'glidebomb'( interesting phrase) attacks in '43 and '44. Cowpens CVL 25, VT25

[@dingo8babym20]

@@johnwriter8234 What ship/squadron?

[@Anlushac11]

It reminds me of a improved Vindicator. I think its all that glass on the back. By 1945 the Curtiss Helldiver and Grumman Avenger were already due to be replaced by the outstanding Douglas Skyraider.

[@420JackG]

As a pure strike aircraft, obviously the Skyraider is a superior aircraft in all regards. The only role left for traditional torpedo attack aircraft at that point was ASuW stuff.

[@ronaldharris6569]

Yup the skyraider was going to eclipse them all

[@CD-ek3iq]

Just when you think you’ve seen everything WW2 aviation had to offer, along comes Ed with something you never even knew existed. :)

[@michaelmacdonell4834]

As a WWII aviation geek, he keeps blinkin' doing it! The man clearly has sources!

[@janxspirit6707]

Another great subject, never even heard of the Sea Wolf. Ty!

[@kahirdey6200]

I live about a quarter mile down the road from the old GM fisher body plant that built the TBM Avengers in Trenton NJ and they command a lot of respect still.

[@tmutant]

You continue to surprise me with types I never heard of.

[@MarkCSevenSixTwo]

The flying greenhouse. Nice one, Ed 😎👍

[@johnwriter8234]

My Dad was a Radio-Gunner on TBM Squadron Fort Lauderdale 1945 .. his Squadron was part of "Missing 5" ... he was involved in Search/Rescue" of the "Bermuda Triangle" lost TBMS

[@Straswa]

Great vid Ed, thanks for covering the rarely seen aircraft.

[@Ob1sdarkside]

Another gem, thanks!

[@sealove79able]

A great interesting video about the airplane I knew nothing about.Have a good one.

[@lanagro]

In your line-up of weird, odd, and forgotten aircraft there are a few I'd love to see featured. The IK-2 and IK-3 from Yugoslavia, the VL Humu and Myrsky from Finland, and the IAe.24 Calquin from Argentina are a few suggestions.

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

All on the list :)

[@TheJttv]

This looks like a plane built for skits. I can just see 4 lads goofing around in there.

[@scootergeorge9576]

A pity the Beatles were not yet available.

[@alexzenz760]

@@scootergeorge9576 beatle actually existed already , base for VW "kuebelwagen" . Means bucketcar.

[@scootergeorge9576]

@@alexzenz760 - The Kubelwagon was an adaptation of the KDF, "Strength Through Joy" Beetle, later renamed "people's car." There was also an amphibious "Swimming wagon." And my favorite Hitler photo is him seated in a prototype Beetle convertible, circa 1939.

[@alexzenz760]

@@scootergeorge9576 engineering by ferdinand porsche.

[@scootergeorge9576]

@@alexzenz760 - Yes. The man was also involved in tank and armored vehicle design.

[@SeannoG1]

That canopy gives a whole new meaning to "greenhouse"

[@stephenrickstrew7237]

Thanks fir a great episode ..It’s Tough to beat Grumman at making a carrier aircraft … the Corsair vrs Hellcat is the classic case Cost, carrier operation and parking and handling … the Grumman style Folding wing might have sealed the deal … those top folding wings take up more room and probably aren’t as robust …

[@stanhathcoat920]

Very interesting, Ed, also a contestant for the ugliest aircraft of the era! I can't imagine the "Sea Wolf"(cool name) being anywhere near the survivability of " inflicted damage" reputation Grumman had at this point! The use of the Pratt & Whitney radial was very wise, it's the rest of the aircraft that boggles my mind! The inclusion of a landing gear, flaps, prop pitch is extraordinary, reminds me of the FW190 throttle conveniences, not replicated until the 1980s!

[@aaronlopez3585]

Ed great video "it missed the boat" I see what you did there nice pun.🤭

[@richardferg6455]

Awesome, for a guy that prides himself on ww2 aviation history. You surprise me yet again. So glad found your channel. Nice plane but that greenhouse! Would make early French bombers jealous!

[@red.5475]

I absolutely love this aircraft, one of my favorite.

[@kjellegilhustad2095]

It looks so mutch better inn the old videos than it does in pictures.

[@leecutler1527]

Another brilliant video of the lesser known types. Please please please do a video on the grumman f11 f1 super tiger.

[@gerhardris]

Great video! I had never heard of it. For what it's worth aplying the saying: "If it looks good, it probably flies good" then there is possibly another reason the Avenger got the better of this one. Talking about unknown tb aircraft albeit shipboarn floatplane the Fokker T8W. Maybe a topic for another pic?

[@davidrobinson4553]

Great content Ed 👍👍

[@stewpacalypse7104]

You could also use it for growing plants during the winter.

[@ronjon7942]

3:51. If I could have just one... Production facilities pictures like these are in such stark contrast to warbird rarity today. A picture of the first arrested carrier landing would be nice to uncover.

[@Nihilist_Saint]

Thanks for doing one of my favorites!

[@markisganitis3496]

This aircraft was built at the Queen City airport in Allentown Pa where my son got his pilots license. It is very sad that the Navy scrapped every single one of the TBYs. The only actual production items left are a canopy that one of the line workers "liberated" when production was shut down and it now sits in the flight office at Queen City along with a display of production pictures and drawings. There is also a book on the Seawolf of which I have a copy, but I don't know if they are still available.

[@janwitts2688]

The USN could have done with a few squadrons of swordfish fitted for night operations... would have been a surprise for the IJN

[@leifvejby8023]

Would indeed! :-D

[@scottclaymore8097]

I knew someone would bring up the stringbag. If all the USN did was sneak attacks (Mers-el-Kebir and Taranto) or attacks on un-escorted capital ships with crap anti-aircraft capabilities (Bismark and Prinz Eugen) which were the swordfish's big win, they still would have been better off without the swordfish. Yes, it could fly, carry, and drop a torpedo but the IJN would have made mincemeat out of them the same way Jerry did during the channel dash.

[@CorePathway]

Look up Black Cat PBY Catalinas.

[@stephenjones6500]

@@scottclaymore8097 the Germans had fairly decent for the time anti air systems but they were calibrated For far faster aircraft than the swordfish which really should have been looked on as a sort of helicopter substitute .

[@robertdendooven7258]

Without the better British air launched torpedo, no British aircraft would have done better than an American made plane.

[@Phoenix-xn3sf]

Yeah, 'Seawolves assemble!!!' just doesn't have the same ring to it. Great video about a plane I have never heard of before, and I went through a quite obsessive airplane-phase as a kid in the late 80's and early 90's. :-)

[@robertdendooven7258]

I have been intrigued with this aircraft since I discovered it about 5 years ago. I agree that it is a great example of a "What if" airplane. Whereas Grumman seemed to not try for exotic or complicated designs of new aircraft, Vought seemed to be the opposite around this time period. Both the XTBU (TBY) and F4U suffered long development times compared to their Grumman competitors like the TBF and F6F respectively. Both of the latter were more conventional aircraft with lower performance characteristics, but were available with less issues in a faster development time. While they did not have the performance level of the Vought designed aircraft, the Grumman aircraft were very good and reliable aircraft that were available when needed with enough performance to do the job they were designed to do. A couple of corrections or additional info. The August 1941 flight date for the Avenger was the first flight of the aircraft, not by the Navy, but by Grumman. The initial flight of the XTBU was on December 21, 1941. A more correct comparison. Before the tail was ripped off when doing arrested landing tests, the US Navy had already questioned the location of the tail hook on the prototype. The original location of the tailhook was between the ventral gun station and the tail wheel. The rebuilt XTBU had the tailhook moved to a position behind the tail wheel which was moved forward. Another reason Grumman was faster with production of the TBF was that the Navy gave them a production order before the the August 1941 initial flight of the aircraft. The Navy was taking a chance that the TBF would be a good aircraft before it even flew. Whereas Vought did not get a production order until after the Navy had tested the prototype in the first part of 1942.

[@Ballterra]

Love your work Ed. Still waiting on the Blackburn Firebrand story though?

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

All in good time... 😉

[@majorbloodnok6659]

I'm a big fan of the Seawolf, thanks for covering it.

[@stephenmeier4658]

Have you done a video on the Fisher P-75? Or maybe the Truman Commission?

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

I must admit no to both.

[@kenlodge3399]

Timing is everything.

[@88SC]

Exhaust system outlets look like those on the early F4Us. Not surprising, but it’s a cool detail. The greenhouse makes it look like a trainer for a whole classroom.

[@johnwriter8234]

My father was radio/gunner in USN TBM Avenger

[@glennridsdale577]

The Avenger was in most regards the best carrier based torpedo bomber, but the most successful was the Swordfish.

[@pjornowski1]

such a awesome vid and a really interesting aircraft.

[@donjones4719]

How bullet resistant was the huge greenhouse? Is that a 4 man crew, or two positions for the 3rd man. Or there is a 4th just for the radar - but seems you'd just want to train the bombardier for that.

[@jamesricker3997]

3 crew for an Avenger and you could cram more Avengers into a carrier's hanger deck It wasn't getting adopted

[@rodgerhecht3623]

Very informative, i had never seen or herd of that one.

[@frankdrevinpolicesquad2930]

Can't imagine that Greenhouse canopy in the very hot Pacific theater

[@TheIndianalain]

Incredibly ugly! I'm surprised the Fleet Air Arm didn't order some of them... ;-)

[@athelwulfgalland]

I was thinking to myself that this looked like the ugly USN cousin to the FAA Fairey Barracuda!

[@duncanhamilton5841]

The fact it had decent performance automatically ruled it out for FAA service.

[@jonsouth1545]

@@duncanhamilton5841 The "good" performance was actually often counterproductive and is a large reason why torpedo bombers no longer exist and the aircraft that do launch a torpedo nowadays are helicopters. As there is a maximum limit to the speed at which you can jettison a torpedo and have it go through water accurately or even survive the transition from air to water thus extreme low speed and good low-speed maneuverability are essential for accurate drops, unfortunately, this requirement means you are a sitting duck to any fighter cover so you create a trade-off between accurate drops and the ability to evade fighters while going to the target the American torpedo bombers had to slow down when conducting an attack run and during the drop itself would be flying at almost identical speeds as the UK torpedo bombers and were more at risk from AA etc during the run itself as they lacked the slow speed maneuverability, while the UK focused more on the accuracy of drop and maneuverability during the attack run itself relying on fighters and their significantly better fighter director control at the time to provide cover for the torpedo bombers, which is a major part of why the Fairey Swordfish sank significantly more shipping than any other torpedo bomber of any combatant in the war. a good but often overlooked example of the effectiveness is in the Mediterranean a single squadron of 27 Swordfish aircraft from Malta sank an average of 50,000 tons of shipping a month for 9 consecutive months in late 1941-42 with a record of 98,000 tons in one month (numbers comparable to the entire U-boat arm in the Atlantic during the same period) people often have a top trumpsesq reaction to aircraft where they look at stats like speed and automatically think that a bigger number is better, while ignoring other factors like the mission requirement doctrinal differences and other intangibles.

[@steveshoemaker6347]

Thanks Ed

[@christianlords1340]

i would love to fly around the country in a seawolf!!!! love that long cockpit

[@jasonshull3106]

Great video as always thanks from JDS in AZ usa

[@bigemugamer]

DAMN! That's a LOT of canopy! =)

[@martintaper7997]

Captain to crew: "What's the vision like?"

[@Itsjustme-Justme]

The USN had the Avanger, the Dauntless and the Helldiver in large quantities. They did not need another carrier bomber during the war. The whole parts supply system was set up to support the already existing aircraft and it would have been a huge task to replace one of them because the whole parts supply would have to be changed to the new type. You don't do that when the new type does not offer major improvements. Especially not when you have to fight thousands of miles away from the factories. By the end of the war the Corsair proved itself as a highly efficient flighter bomber and strafer on low altitude, replacing the Dauntless and in part even the Helldiver and Avanger. Its major advantages was not needing any fighter escort in any circumstances and being smaller. Right after the war, the Skyraider and Mauler were ready and offered major improvements over both the Avenger and the Sea Wolf. The whole convept of multi seat naval attack bombers was outdated because the improvement in performance offered by skipping the rear turret gave more benefit than the firepower of the turret. It was a time of very fast technical developement. A delay of half a year compared to a roughly similar opponent meant that a design was outdated. At the end the Sea Wolf had a delay of more than 3 years. If they had known how much delay would accumulate, they would better have just set up another Avanger production line.

[@johnshepherd8687]

By midway through 1943 the Navy already decided that the torpedo and dive bomber could be merged into a single strike aircraft. The late model Corsairs already carried a larger bomb load than the TBF/M oe the SB2C. It is a wonder that they even bothered pursuing this. I guess it is a product of virtually unconstrained budgets.

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

Indeed. Hence the Mauler, skyraider and the Kaiser-fleetwing!

[@dougreid2351]

"Unconstrained budgets" John Shepherd you got that exactly correct. Plus they were minful, right up until the surrender of the Empire of Japan, how bloody the conquest of the home islands wwould be. The big budget purse continued to be displayed in the construction of startegic bombers and high speed interceptors for the new USAF.

[@jamesricker3997]

@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters the Fleetwing and the Maluer had handling issues, bad thing when landing on a carrier The Skyraider was smaller than the Maluer, a carrier could hold 3 skydivers for every 2 maulers

[@ariancontreras4358]

While the Corsairs could in theory be equipped with 2000 to 4000 lbs in theory thanks to pylons, in practics the late model corsairs could not carry a bigger a load than TBF/M or the SB2C. You are trying to quote theoretical paper values. In actual practice the corsair usually carried either one 1,000lb bomb or eight rockets so it could still have range. The biggest practical load a corsair could carry was 1000lb bomb with eight rockets. This is because the range went way down the further you increased the load. The bombers could actually carry the same 1000lb load even further and could carry a 1600 to 2000 lbs while still having a 100+ mile combat radius. Corsairs if they carried a 2000lb load meanwhile could not carry the same load as far which means the carriers would have to get closer. And the main advantage the carrier has over the battleship is striking distance.

[@ariancontreras4358]

@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters He's actually wrong. Corsairs in practice only did 1000lb bomb loads and needed a drop tank to go about the same distance as the more dedicated bombers. That's why a Corsair with a 2000lb bomb load was rarely used.

[@ryanmurphy4834]

This video goes along great with your fairey spearfish video, a great video to go along with your m.20 video would be the xp-77.

[@jehb8945]

Like somebody else pointed out holy glazed cockpit Batman but at the same time this thing had a pratt and Whitney r2800 any top speed close to an F4F wildcat. This makes me wonder if the Navy had realized defensive gunners were a dumb idea sooner we could have gotten a single seat or even a two seat attack aircraft with an r2800 and swapping out the third crew member for more forward firing machine guns / Auto cannons and a 360 mph top speed that losses amongst dive bomber and torpedo bomber squadrons would have been significantly lower as all you really needed to outrun most Japanese fighters was 330 knots of top speed.

[@dingo8babym20]

Knowledge is built on experience

[@MisterOcclusion]

You'd think that bits of one would have survived as the greenhouse of some base commanders wife. Definitely can see the Vought lineage in it.

[@dashcroft1892]

0:42 … RCN markings … flying off of HMCS Bonaventure?

[@safetyfirstintexas]

With all that added performance makes you wonder what better feats could be achieved with it.

[@BobSmith-dk8nw]

Thanks. That was interesting. I'd never heard of this aircraft. .

[@Not_So_Weird_in_Austin]

I never heard of any other Torpedo plane in the USA other than the Avenger! thanks for the video on the Sea Wolf

[@michaelwallbrown3726]

Curtiss SB2C Helldiver,Douglass SBD Dauntless

[@VersusARCH]

That vertical stabilizer seems bigger than I-16's wing

[@alessiodecarolis]

Wasn't a little too vulnerable that greenhouse cockpit?

[@dingo8babym20]

My Dad, and his squadron VT- 25 already had 20some - odd combat missions in the Avenger, and had rotated states side, by the time the Sea Wolf entered production.

[@gglen2141]

Prior to the inevitable fiery death, it must have been awesome riding around in that flying greenhouse.

[@thedungeondelver]

How many crew did that thing have? Pilot, tail gunner, B/N, scope dope...4 at least, right?

[@christopherkroussoratsky2014]

I would like to see you do an episode on the Sukhoi Su-12. A post war aircraft that was heavily influenced by the Focke-Wulf 189.

[@lav25og83]

They had to roll them from the factory across a State road and up a slope to the airfield and runway in Allentown Pa.

[@SteamCrane]

That canopy makes sense if it has a galley and head.

[@aquilarossa5191]

The Crystal Palace is the first thing I thought of when I saw that thing.

[@foamer443]

If they had been surplused to the public I would easily imagine budding tourist flight operators snapping them up.

[@wbertie2604]

Was this for torpedoes or growing tomatoes at sea to avoid scurvy?

[@ponybottle]

'best' can often be a subjective term. If 'tonnage-sunk' is the defining variable then I believe the prize goes to the humble British Swordfish.

[@austenbin4068]

Interesting. Never heard of the Sea Wolf before. Not a handsome plane compared to the Avenger. A standard RADAR seemed like a nice feature and the auto set landing configuration is cool. For a shallow guy who likes pretty planes, I'm kind of glad this never took hold.

[@NH2112]

I wonder what would happen if the auto land was engaged and the pilot had to bolter, what kind of delay would there be after disengaging auto land and slamming the throttle to the stop?

[@robertdendooven7258]

@@NH2112 I don't think it ever happened to give it a try. I have a book on the XTBU/TBY and it claimed that the "auto land" system was very tricky to set properly and it had to be rigorously tested on each plane before it could be OK'd to use. The plane was not made in the quantity or used enough that more than a few people probably were ever trained to set it properly.

[@NH2112]

@@robertdendooven7258 I’m just trying to imagine what kind of engineering nightmare it must have been, probably getting electrical, pressure, and vacuum signals. I can’t even imagine the lag the system must have had.

[@minuteman4199]

I remember seeing Avengers flying in the early 80s. They were used in New Brunswick Canada to spray insecticide on forests.

[@richardferg6455]

Please do one on the vultee vengeance A35 (I think).

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

On the list already 😁

[@wideyxyz2271]

Plus you could grow all kinds of exotic fruit in the green house!

[@lnchgj]

.250 plex? You realize the 7.7mm could get through almost 3/8" of mild steel. Although you have a point, .020 aluminum would be easier to maintain.

[@mikearmstrong8483]

Rear gunner: Hey, can you pass a message to the pilot for me? Navigator: Just call him on the phone. Rear gunner: I can't; the guy downstairs is tying up the line. Navigator: Well then, use the semaphore system. Rear gunner: Your bean poles are blocking the line of sight. Navigator: Well, did you just want carrots with dinner all week?

[@tomasinacovell4293]

But I heard that the true heir apparent to the Avenger was to be the AD Skyraider along with the Bearcat fighter had the war managed to go into the following year against Japan?

[@stephengardiner9867]

I find it interesting that both Vought/Consolidated and Grumman could and did create turrets for the rear facing .50 mgs in their respective aircraft whereas Curtiss (for the Helldiver) simply could not.

[@stevenbass732]

Grumman's reputation for building rugged, survivable aircraft is what carried them through WW2. Comparatively, this aircraft just looks fragile.

[@williammcassell3088]

ARE THERE ANY IN MUSEUM?

[@chrismartin3197]

Nope. All gone

[@billsixx]

Oh? Which was better? TBF or TBM?

[@babboon5764]

Sounds like what really did for the Sea Wolf was the lead time needed by Consolidated to build the new factory. Would have been bloody hot under all that perspex in the Pacific theatre mind.

[@fatdad64able]

If you don't want a certain aircraft to enter mass production, damage it and claim a cadet pilot ran into it.

[@johnwayne6501]

that was came into my mind....Grumman didn't want to lose their slush money?

[@nairbvel]

Maybe the guy's father worked for Grumman...? LOL

[@rileycpo]

Was the Cadets name Ensign John McCain?

[@mikebeard8505]

Feel free to keep the drivel in your head

[@mikebeard8505]

@@rileycpo if he was a cadet, then he was not an Ensign...genius

[@ncage2621]

I've always liked the look of the Tarpon. 👍🇬🇧.

[@vanja2565]

Can you please do a video about Ikarus IK-3 and IK-2?

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

On the list 😉

[@Parocha]

Paint it yellow and you can claim its a winged school bus for Navy kids

[@g00gleminus96]

The bombs on the bus go boom boom boom, boom boom boom, boom boom boom.

[@OffGridInvestor]

Congress would approve that funding. "Think about the CHILDREN!!"

[@anthonychappell9409]

I have heard that the most successful torpedo bomber of ww2 was the Italian SM79. I have also heard that the most successful type for the allies, was the humble Swordfish. I'm not saying g that I am definitely correct...it is just what I have heard

[@kurttate9446]

The Swordfish never experienced the Pacific.

[@anthonychappell9409]

@@kurttate9446 True, however; it was in use throughout the war. I did check yesterday. According to Wikipedia; it was responsible for the destruction of more axis shipping than any other single type.

[@VersusARCH]

SM79 was perhaps the most successful ITALIAN torpedo bomber of the war.

[@louisecairney5068]

Wow!!!!! look at that radar, much needed in that theatre, we in the UK had no need for such a plane but we did really lol. I thought it was only night fighters and heavy bombers that had radar onboard and then only passive radar, did they (America) receive the know how to construct their own radar?

[@jeffbrowning3349]

The British were responsible for development, the Americans for production.

[@gregoryemmanuel9168]

What a weird looking, ungainly plane… I had no idea, thank you 🙏🏼

[@chocolatte6157]

And the flexibility of this plane was demonstrated when sailors were able to improve their diets by growing vegetables in the cockpit when the plane was not flying a combat mission.

[@AnonNomad]

Goddamn. Lmao.

[@Christian762]

How much glass should we use on the canopy? Yes.

[@McRocket]

You've done it again, Ed. Never heard of this plane before. Thank you. I have long, liked the Avenger. It just looks right to me. One thing about it though. Why did Grumman stick the Avenger with the older-designed, less powerful, R-2600 Twin Cyclone engine? But, Vought (who designed the Sea Wolf), from the beginning, put in the far more modern and substantially more powerful, R-2800 Double Wasp? I guess Grumman was a bit 'Cyclone-obsessed' as apparently the Hellcat originally was designed with the Twin-Cyclone. Before they came to their senses and stuck the Double Wasp in it. But just imagine how much better the Avenger could have been with an additional 3-400 horsepower (as the Sea Wolf had)?

[@robertdendooven7258]

You are right about the Hellcat. The F6F-1 had the R-2600, but the Navy came to Grumman and told them to use the more powerful R-2800 which resulted in the F6F-3. Maybe Vought thought that the R-2800 would be better since they also designed the XF4U with it. It also had something to do with Vought was part of a company that also owned Pratt & Whitney. 😉

[@cnfuzz]

That one is new to me , i love oddball planes

[@bigemugamer]

The Sea Wolf is nice lol SOOO much window, but the Avenger has been one of my fav WWII American aircraft since I was a kid.