Author Topic: Rumors of a New Grumman Bird? (Read 2297 times)

Rino · « **Reply #30 on:** September 25, 2004, 10:21:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Muckmaw1
You did'nt read the whole thread did you?

2 WEEKS DETENTION!!!

Seriously, about 10 posts up I corrected my mistake. I accidentally substituted the F7F Tigercat for the F5F Skyrocket.

Only 2 Skyrockets were built where there were numerous F7Fs.

You know the real b*tch of it is the museum I work at has neither airplane.

http://www.cradleofaviation.org

It's not entirely dedicated to Grumman, but most of the collection celebrates their work. And we do have the oldest surviving F-14.

Meanwhile....Whats going on at the CON. We got a gag order over there or what???

Sorry...I was kind of interested in the topic myself

Tails · « **Reply #31 on:** September 25, 2004, 11:01:38 PM »

Only new grumman 'cat' I want to see is the PBY

Drex · « **Reply #32 on:** September 26, 2004, 08:59:37 PM »

The F8F is indeed coming, and it will have my name across it, right Nate?

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMER!!!

Drex

NUKE · « **Reply #33 on:** September 26, 2004, 09:03:23 PM »

Why the Bearcat? Did they even see action in WWII?

Rafe35 · « **Reply #34 on:** September 26, 2004, 09:25:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
Why the Bearcat? Did they even see action in WWII?

Nope....They never see action over WWII, but they have see action over IndoChina for FRENCH ONLY while we were over war in Korea in 1950-1953!

tzr · « **Reply #35 on:** September 26, 2004, 10:17:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ra
Combat duty. But did they see combat?

Was reading up on F7F..Long time ago and it said the F7F DID see combat...as a ground attack...helping Marines mop up some small pockets of Japanese

Rafe35 · « **Reply #36 on:** September 26, 2004, 11:27:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by tzr
Was reading up on F7F..Long time ago and it said the F7F DID see combat...as a ground attack...helping Marines mop up some small pockets of Japanese

I did also read about F7F long time ago and I did forgot something about USMC F7F(Must be Prototype or just fresh one) in the Pacific of World War II. All I know that their date deployed in 1944.

But I can't tell it true because many people included Grumman Aircraft Company said that F7F and F8F did not see any action in WWII.

Widewing · « **Reply #37 on:** September 27, 2004, 12:22:22 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tails
Only new grumman 'cat' I want to see is the PBY

Consolidated built the PBY, not Grumman. Grumman waas responsible for the Goose, Mallard and Albatross.

My regards,

Widewing

Widewing · « **Reply #38 on:** September 27, 2004, 12:26:08 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
Why the Bearcat? Did they even see action in WWII?

No, the Bearcat didn't get to the war in time. However, several squadrons were enroute aboard CVs headed to Japan when the surrender occurred.

They would have been a rude shock to the Japanese. It was probably the best piston-engine interceptor ever built.

My regards,

Widewing

Guppy35 · « **Reply #39 on:** September 27, 2004, 12:44:35 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by J_A_B
"Too many planes that actually participated in the conflict that should come long before the might have beens, had no impact on the war types. "

This is only relevant for people who are actually interested in somehow re-creating WW2.

IMO, since the MA in no way represents any past war, plane additions should be chosen more for usefulness and how well they "fit" in the MA than worthless factors like nationality or WW2 usage (and if I had my way, there'd be several different arenas with different eras of airplanes available, instead of a single MA). A better argument against the "uber" propeller planes like the Sea Fury and the Bearcat (especially the 20mm ones) is that they're simply "too good" to make for good balance against the majority of piston-engine fighters.

Personally, I view a transport as the single biggest plane type AH2 needs as an addition since it's a much-used type with only a single model to choose from currently.

J_A_B

Since they call it Aces High and expect historically accurate skins for their aircraft, I'd be hard pressed to say HT and company are looking for the 'what might have been' in determining a plane set.

You have to have some sort of basis to determine which planes fit and basing it on the conflict that was WW2 seems to be what they are doing.

Otherwise it's SWOTL all over again

And while I understand what you are saying about a transport, it is "Aces High" which does seem to imply some sort of air combat.

Dan/Slack
who is content with the aircraft already in the game if you really want to know

moot · « **Reply #40 on:** September 27, 2004, 02:25:45 AM »

Guppy, you haven't seen the old poll by Pyro, where he asks what plane from a list including P47M and P51H the players would like next?

mipoikel · « **Reply #41 on:** September 27, 2004, 04:25:15 AM »

It must be something like this. Would be cool...

CMC Airboss · « **Reply #42 on:** September 27, 2004, 02:20:54 PM »

One of the flyable F7F Tigercats raced at Reno this year.

http://www.airrace.org/gallery/web/ncar2004/19sept/0437-_g5z8649_std.jpg

MiG

Plankton · « **Reply #43 on:** September 27, 2004, 11:59:31 PM »

If you have some spare cash, you can even buy an F7F Here or an F8F Here

Krusty · « **Reply #44 on:** September 28, 2004, 12:31:59 AM »

Grumman F7F-3
Twin engined, carrier based fighter bomber.
Powerplant: 2x 2100hp P&W R-2800-34W
Max speed: 435 mph at 22,000 feet. Cruising speed 222. Ceiling: 40,700 feet. Normal range: 1,200 mi.

Weights: empty 16,270lb, max takeoff: 25,720lb. Armament: 4x 20mm cannon in wing roots and 4x .50cal in nose, "plus one torpedo beneath the fuselage and up to 1,000lb of bombs under each wing." (according to my sources, that's 1x torp ***AND*** 2x 1000lb - 1 under EACH wing... no more TBM. No more Ju88, baby, here comes a torp bomber that can DEFEND itself!)