Some thoughts about the SB2c=C

[Helldiver]

To begin with, it was never, ever known as SOB second class. That was a name given to the Helldiver by a young writer. It was known as, "Two-Cee" or a "Beast". Both we crewman and pilots liked it. It had some hydraulic problems.That's the only rblems with it. It was a poor gunners platform. Only shots along side or straight over head were OK but the wing and tail limits kind of stopped anything down below.
Plus when you got the rear canopy down and you pumped the seat up to the gunners position, you caused such turbulence the pilot loses some tail control. So the guy in the rear was limited to keep the logistic board, trying to figger out five letter code groups and looking at the radar. And of course keeping the pilot awake. Miles and miles of sea gets pretty boring. Couple o blasts of pure oxygen would correct any hangover. Well, most of them.
The plane landed pretty good. It landed at 65 MPH and the deck was moving (37 knots) or 40 MPH. Never had a landing gear accident. One cruise we lost three F6-F (N) two TBFs and one Corsair. All Helldivers were safe. None of them ran into the crash barrier.
By the way, the Beast has the record of ships sunk by all forces, both allied and enemy. Dive bombing is not as easy as it looks.
One English man wrote about three SB2C squadrons that were trained in my home town in Beverly. I have a personal reason to contact any one that were in those squadrons. I been trying for years.
It was this crewman's opinion the Two-Cee was a large, comfortable and reliable aircraft/ A bomber that would keep up with the fighters.

[heywooood]

Terrific information, thanks Helldiver.
I always thought that SOB moniker came frome the crews..

[Cees Donker]

Dear Bob,

It's so good to read something from you again. Glad you're still around. We here at the OH were a bit worried. I read about your eyesight in the other thread. So I've increased the size of the letters a bit.

Kind regards,

Cees

[sidler]

OMG!! I was thinking about you the other day....was wondering if you were still around! Glad to see you are.

Sidler

[Roger]

Glad to see you on the forums, Bob

[Helldiver]

It really was wonderful to hear from you, Cees. A lot has happened to Flight Simulator since Bruce Artwick's stick figures. The scenery and the airplanes are so realistic.
I remember all the help that you gave others including scenery you built yourself. All pushing the frontiers of Flight Simulator. We all owe you our greatest thanks.
The pictures of Airplane Heaven's Helldiver really bring the life to my old aircraft. It's too bad it came out too late for my failing eyes.
I wonder, did they include the bungee cords for seat retraction and the wobble pump to raise the gunner's seat. They must have, because it's the same pump that's used for canopy retraction and elevating.
Did they keep the three instruments under the slide out tray. The more I think about it, things come back, slowly. A 71 year old, stroke ravaged memory, is not too reliable.
Bob

[bazzar]

Hi Bob, we got most of it. Couldn't do the bungees but the pump is there I take it

you mean the hydraulics gauges near the floor? If so, yes. The cockpit is modeled

on an earlier -3. With the risk of turbulence and directional instabilities, can you

remember why the canopies were ordered locked-open in a dive? Pressure relief?

[davido53]

I've read most of the aviation books written about WWII and I remember specifically a story from one that a 2C was running it's engine at an airfield and the entire tail just fell off.

The consensus seemed to be that it was not very aerodynamic or well-built.

[Bomber_12th]

I've read most of the aviation books written about WWII and I remember specifically a story from one that a 2C was running it's engine at an airfield and the entire tail just fell off.

The consensus seemed to be that it was not very aerodynamic or well-built.

That comes from the book Flights of Passage - Reflections of a World War II Aviator, by Samuel Hynes. I would take his comments with a grain of salt - I'm afraid his remarks in that book about the SB2C are well off the mark, especially as he refers to so many of the Helldiver's problems a being electrical in nature, where in fact all of the electrical systems he refers to are/were actually hydraulically controlled on the Helldiver and thus wouldn't have had any of the issues he mentions at all. According to one of the CAF pilots who has over 200 hours flying the Helldiver, having talked to many WWII Helldiver pilots over the years, they all told of diving the aircraft at 70+ degrees up to the aircraft redline with dive brakes to below 2000 feet before pulling out (which is also fully contrary to what Samuel Hynes writes about the Helldiver pilots being scared of putting too much stress on the airplane and only making gentle "glides" to/over targets). According to the same CAF pilot, the story about the tail falling off during the engine run-up seems very unlikely - to the point of really sounding made-up. The consensus it seems is that the early versions of the Helldiver were not very well liked by those who had been attached to the SBD, and some will have gone to some great lengths (perhaps well over the edge!) to try and make the Helldiver out to being far worse than it really was/is.

[stansdds]

It's good to hear from our own Helldiver!

[davido53]

I would imagine that any a/c that had the tail just fall off must have undergone some kind of major maintenance and was not reattached correctly. Or it could have been a myth passed from one sailor to another, who knows...

[Smashing Time]

For what its worth...

From a book by Barrett Tillman & Robert L. Lawson
Dive and Torpedo Bombers of WWII

[Duckie]

...and not just dive bombers...

[stansdds]

I was about to say the same thing, but Duckie beat me to it. Plenty of aircraft suffered tail section failures during carrier traps. Between metal fatigue and hard/over speed landings, something was going to fail and it was not confined to the SB2C.

[SSI01]

May be a little OT but I'm sure of intense interest - AH has emailed an update (v1.1) for the new SB2C, I got it in the overnight inbox. It addresses a number of issues, most visible being the rear gunner's arrangements. If you signed up for automatic update notifications you should receive it today.

It doesn't address anything about the tail falling off, though!

[IFlySWA]

...Wildcat's too.

[Bomber_12th]

All these photos of tails coming off aircraft from carrier landings has nothing to do with the original Samuel Hynes story that was originally posted about - the setting of that story was land-based, and supposedly the tail came off after the guy in the cockpit was running the engine at full-bore for an extended amount of time.

[wombat666]

All these photos of tails coming off aircraft from carrier landings has nothing to do with the original Samuel Hynes story that was originally posted about - the setting of that story was land-based, and supposedly the tail came off after the guy in the cockpit was running the engine at full-bore for an extended amount of time.

I think that just might do it John! Especially if she was 'restrained'.

As much as I love Seafires the number of fuselage and undercarriage failures caused by landing a delicate aeroplane on a carrier is legendary.

[bazzar]

Early Hawker Typhoons lost their tails, often in flight, tragically. The result was a row of fishplates stitched around te transport joint.

[hairyspin]

Reportedly Hawker were never completely sure they had solved that problem. Tiffies, like most combat aircraft, also engendered fierce loyalty among their pilots who learned to fly and fight them to their limits.

[wombat666]

As a matter of personal interest (re the FAA paint) I dug through decades of Air Internationals to re-read 'Winkle' Brown's article on the Helldiver.
I won't comment further except to say he was certainly an equal opportunity critic, very scathing of the Fairy Barracuda, Blackburn Firebrand and the Fairy Spearfish!

[stansdds]

All these photos of tails coming off aircraft from carrier landings has nothing to do with the original Samuel Hynes story that was originally posted about - the setting of that story was land-based, and supposedly the tail came off after the guy in the cockpit was running the engine at full-bore for an extended amount of time.

Perhaps that aircraft was not chocked and tied to the ground, but had its tail section tethered to a tree and the full power runs placed excessive stress on the tail section.