mdesaxe

Thanks again to everyone for all the assistance on this question. Maurice

Christopher, I have to disagree with your interpretation of the implications of these revision documents. All that Revision "A" tells us about the wings is that the original intent, in September 1940, was for all 100 G-36B aircraft to have folding wings. Grumman first proposed a folding wing to the US Navy in March 1940 but the prototype XF4F-4 did not make its first flight until April 1941. It was found to be significantly over-weight and Grumman reconfigured the folding mechanism to operate manually with a crank instead of using a hydraulic power system. In light of this delay, I am sure that BAPC decided to accept some aircraft with fixed wings to speed delivery, which occurred, since these fixed-wing airframes were delivered before the first flight of the XF4F-4. As I noted earlier, my colleague on Long Island and I have not yet uncovered the correspondence on this topic in order to date the change order. Nevertheless, we don't have to "throw the baby out with the bathwater" on the basis of revisions "A" and "B" because we have primary documentary evidence that the first ten G-36B aircraft had fixed wings. It takes the form of AP 2031B, Pilot's Notes for the Martlet II (the first half of which was almost certainly written by Grumman) which contains the special note at the beginning about the first 10 Martlet II aircraft (AM954-AM963). It states that they were fitted with fixed wings (Grumman parts No. 10875) which we have since been able to determine were identical to those fitted on the F4F-3 but without flotation equipment. If you recall the beginning of my thread on this topic, my question was what primary evidence there was for Grumman or BAPC fitting different engines in the 10 fixed-wing G-36B airframes from those used in the other 90 machines in light of the fact that AP 20131B does not mention this, while it does highlight the other differences. Statements to this effect exist in print, but none were supported by primary source material. With all due respect to Bruce Archer, his citations for this configuration, in the article to which you guided me, are not primary sources either. So my question still is - what evidence is there that the 10 G-36B aircraft with fixed wings used two-stage Twin Wasp engines? Maurice

Nick, Iain, Colin, et al. This is from the Martlet II (Grumman Model G-36B) Pilot's Notes: It may be wishful thinking that leads me to think the data plate says it's a Model ST-1A gun sight. Is that what it really is? Incidentally, note the ring on the starboard side for the ring-and-bead sight. Maurice

My Grumman research colleague and I decided to re-examine the firm's own documentation on the British contract for the Grumman Model G-36B (this was the company's designation for all 100 aircraft, regardless of their final configuration) . This is very much a "fly-by" rather than an in-depth excavation, so I'm sure we missed a few items. First, an admission. We did not succeed in finding the complete initial description of Job Order #127 (Grumman's internal designation for Contract A-1548). Nevertheless, we did locate the two principal revisions to the job order. Revision "A" (September 1940) laid out the detail changes (curiously, also cross-referring them to the Model G-36A - the by then ex-French machines): Wings 1. Folding wings. 2. Four .50 caliber gun installations - 2 in each wing. (Wings are to be built for .50 caliber installation as in Navy F4F-4). 3. Large type flotation bags to be included. Fuselage 1. No fuselage guns - small access doors as in G-36A. 2. Large flotation bottle bracket to be installed (Sta.2). 3. Fire extinguisher bottle installed on right side of Sta.2. 4. Recognition device to be installed in place of Very pistol. Instrument Board 1. Prop control as per F4F-3. 2. Air temperature gages located as F4F-3. 3. Additional carburetor air control which G-36A did not have. 4. Flotation and fire extinguisher pulls located on fixed instrument panel. Electrical 1. Four gun switches required. 2. Curtis electric prop installation. 3. Battery support relocated. Engine 1. P & W twin-row 1830 engine to be installed. (similar to 1830-76 without intercoolers) 2. Curtis electric prop - no spinner. 3. Two-speed engine control required. 4. One G-36B airplane to have test instruments: a) Fuel-air analyzer. Outlet oil. c) Thermocouples. 5. Carburetor air control to be added. 6. New oil tank support and straps. Cowling 1. P & W cowling - new ring cowl design in works. Revision "B" the next month listed all these items but made a few significant changes: Wings. Item 2. was changed to six guns, three in each wing. Flotation bags were deleted. Fuselage. Flotation bottle bracket deleted. Instrument board. Flotation pull deleted. Electrical. Six gun switches required. Every extant Grumman document I've seen refers to all the 100 British aircraft as Model G-36B without distinctions. I haven't yet found the correspondence that covers the fitting of fixed wings to the first 10 airframes but, unless this material contains evidence to the contrary, I think these revision documents indicate that none of the G-36B aircraft were equipped with two-stage engines, since the intercoolers were necessary for such an installation. Furthermore, as far as I can determine, the 1830-76 and its successor, the 1830-86, were military engines not yet cleared for export (ignoring the various problems P&W was having with reliability). The revision documents also highlight a new ring cowl design, though its specific differences are not laid out. Finally, the documents indicate that the British expected Grumman to use at least one of the aircraft for some period of testing, which would explain why the first G-36B was retained (as Sturtivant listed). Finally, Mr. Driskill is absolutely correct - the F4F-3A used the single-stage 1830-90 engine without intercoolers. Maurice

My Grumman research colleague and I decided to re-examine the firm's own documentation on the British contract for the Grumman Model G-36B (this was the company's designation for all 100 aircraft, regardless of their final configuration) . This is very much a "fly-by" rather than an in-depth excavation, so I'm sure we missed a few items. First, an admission. We did not succeed in finding the complete initial description of Job Order #127 (Grumman's internal designation for Contract A-1548). Nevertheless, we did locate the two principal revisions to the job order. Revision "A" (September 1940) laid out the detail changes (curiously, also cross-referring them to the Model G-36A - the by then ex-French machines). Wings 1. Folding wings. 2. Four .50 caliber gun installations - 2 in each wing. (Wings are to be built for .50 caliber installation as in Navy F4F-4). 3. Large type flotation bags to be included. Fuselage 1. No fuselage guns - small access doors as in G-36A. 2. Large flotation bottle bracket to be installed (Sta.2). 3. Fire extinguisher bottle installed on right side of Sta.2. 4. Recognition device to be installed in place of Very pistol. Instrument Board 1. Prop control as per F4F-3. 2. Air temperature gages located as F4F-3. 3. Additional carburetor air control which G-36A did not have. 4. Flotation and fire extinguisher pulls located on fixed instrument panel. Electrical 1. Four gun switches required. 2. Curtis electric prop installation. 3. Battery support relocated. Engine 1. P & W twin-row 1830 engine to be installed. (similar to 1830-76 without intercoolers) 2. Curtis electric prop - no spinner. 3. Two-speed engine control required. 4. One G-36B airplane to have test instruments: a) Fuel-air analyzer. Outlet oil. c) Thermocouples. 5. Carburetor air control to be added. 6. New oil tank support and straps. Cowling 1. P & W cowling - new ring cowl design in works.

Nick, My apologies for inadvertently omitting you from the list of those I wished to thank for all their assistance. Thanks to you and again to everyone else who helped clear up this question for me. Maurice

Colin and Iain, Thank you both very much - one more question answered in what seems like the never-ending Martlet saga. Maurice

Christopher, Here are the pertinent entries from Sturtivant's Fleet Air Arm Aircraft 1939-1945: AM954 Deld 4.3.41. Retained by Grumman Aircraft for tests AM964 Deld 4.10.41. Shipped from Norfolk, Va in Illustrious 12.12.41; Off to Machrihanish 21.12.41; Blackburn, Abbotsinch 28.1.42; 881 Sqn from 19.5.42; 888 Sqn Formidable ("F") from 1.42; Kawanishi H6K5 Navy Type 97 shot down in sea blazing, Bay of Bengal 9*23'N 83*10'E, shared with S/L C Ballard 1130 2.8.42 (S/L JE Scott); 881 Sqn, flying practice, spun into ground after stalling turn, exploded, BO, Mackinnon Road, Cat Z 24.8.42 (S/L RR Lamb killed) I was informed by the FAA Museum on one of my research visits that the aircraft record cards that Sturtivant used to create these data were later destroyed (by the Admiralty?), in which case we can't go back and recheck his conclusions. Incidentally, I should take this opportunity to correct en error in my original post - the engine type for the Martlet II was the Pratt & Whitney R-1830-S3C-4G, a commercial equivalent to the military R-1830-90. Maurice

Thank you all - I think this is the one I was after. Maurice

Christopher, I would be delighted to contact Bruce Archer - but I don't know his various addresses. I appreciate very much that he (among others) has done a lot of research on this topic and his input would be valuable. I believe (from doing a quick and dirty search) that he visits this forum, so I'm sure he could participate. On the subject of the photograph, I have gone over the original 8x10 print in detail and concluded: 1-the rear right hand Martlet II does indeed have folding wings and six guns 2-it also has BOTH types of pitot. 3-the serial is visible and could possibly be AM964 ("5" and "6" can look very much alike) Nevertheless, I think Grumman got the caption right, because the captioning lists both the construction number and serial and the captioner would have had to get both of them wrong for the serial to be AM964. Ray Sturtivant notes that, while AM954 was delivered officially on 4 March 4 1941, Grumman retained this machine and it did not go into FAA service. My suspicion is that what we can see here is the outcome of trial installations for the final folding wing Martlet II configuration, conducted using AM954. Incidentally, I have another image from Grumman (pretty poor quality, though) that shows why the AMxxx series of Martlet II aircraft had that enlarged fairing below the forward fuselage - it covers some extended fuel plumbing (whose purpose I don't yet fully understand) that was deleted on other later airframes. Maurice.

Iain, Here's the entry in full (complete with spelling errors): Auxilliary bead and ring sight for guns will be the same as the French installation. Main gun sight will be ST-1A, contractor furnished, and will be similar to the French installation except that lowering and revision of the support bracket will cause relocation of some flight instruments. If it helps, the document is dated July 9, 1940 Maurice

Here are a couple of images that may be useful. The first is the camouflage diagram for Martlet II and Martlet IV aircraft. It's interesting to note that Grumman calls the undersurface colour "Duck Egg Blue" even though we know from other factory records that it was actually "Sky". The second, dated March 21, 1941, is of the first F4F-3A (c/n 757) for Greece that subsequently became a Fleet Air Arm Martlet III (serial AX727, according to Bruce Archer's article) The date is before the German attack on Greece but it is not at all clear what the national markings are. The aircraft is carrying a civil registration NX-26874 and it also has camouflage on the upper surfaces, but I have no idea what the colours may be. Maurice

Ian, Here is another photo of a fixed wing Martlet II to add to your collection. I just received it from a friend who found it a long time ago in the Grumman archive. The Martlets in this image (taken on October 1, 1941) are: Back left - Martlet I c/n 727 serial AX761 (I think) but civil registered NX-37174 and still in Grumman's hands at the time. Back right - Martlet II c/n 2235 serial AM954 with fixed wings. Front left to right - Martlet II c/n 2249 serial AM968, c/n 2248 serial AM967, c/n 2246 serial AM965, c/n 2247 serial AM966, all with six guns and folding wings. AM954 has no lip intake nor intercooler intakes (apparent on the original print). It also has the odd hooked pitot normally attributed to the folding wing Martlets, which raises the interesting question as to why the fixed wing Martlets had no heating element for their pitot but the folding-wing machines did. Anyway - it looks like this image may settle the question of the intakes even if it raises other questions. Maurice

Christopher, Thank you for the references. I was aware of Bruce Archer's article but had a problem locating it before. It is very interesting and helpful, though it doesn't provide a definitive answer to my question. I am very impressed and greatly respect his research, but the references he cites to define the configuration of these 10 aircraft are secondary sources (that doesn't mean they themselves are not based on primary material and Iadmit I have not been able to review all of them myself to determine this). Internal evidence within the Martlet II Pilot's notes indicates that the first half (the technical description) almost certainly was written entirely by Grumman itself for the Air Ministry (it is less definite that the operating instructions were also written by Grumman although I'm sure the firm had considerable input at the very least). It therefore is a primary source. The Martlet II had totally different controls for its single stage supercharger from those used for the two-stage superchargers in F4F-3, F4F-4, and FM-1 aircraft, and these controls (a push-pull knob) could not operate a two-stage supercharger. There is no mention of different controls for the 10 fixed-wing aircraft but all the other differences are spelled out (including the deletion of flotation gear, which did not happen in production for the U.S. Navy until later). That's why I am asking if there is any primary evidence (technical data or clear images) to show that these 10 aircraft used different engines from those of other Martlet II aircraft. Maurice

Iain, No - it was in Grumman documentation on the changes made to the French G-36A aircraft to make them suitable for British service. Maurice

Does anyone know what an ST-1A gun sight is? It's either British or American and was available in 1939-40, but what exactly was it? Maurice

I've been going over my recently-acquired copy of AP 2031B Pilot's Notes for the Martlet II. It has a very interesting special note at the beginning about the first 10 Martlet II aircraft (AM954-AM963), which had fixed wings. It states that the wings were Grumman parts No. 10875, as far as I can determine identical to those fitted on the F4F-3 but without flotation equipment. It goes on to state: The controls necessary to be taped inoperative due to this installation are as follows: Two gun selector switches (Para. 36) Pilot heater switch (Para. 41) Two gun charging handles (Para. 38) The "Pilot" in the second entry is actually a typo - it refers to the heater for the ASI Pressure Head Heating Element (the pitot!). What interests me is that it (Pilot's Notes) indicates that everything else was the same as for the Martlet II aircraft with folding wings, including, presumably, the engine. This should mean that these 10 aircraft had R-1930-90 engines with single stage two-speed supercharges, magnetos on the rear of the engine, no carburetor intake on the upper lip of the cowling, no intercoolers, and therefore no intercooler air intakes inside the cowling. Are there any photographs or other documents out there to verify (or contradict) this? Maurice

About 10 years ago I came across an autobiography by an Australian pilot. He flew, as I recall, just before World War II and then through the war and into the post-war period (by then in general aviation rather than the military). My particular interest is that he served with 805 Squadron, Fleet Air Arm in North Africa. The book had a title something like "Into the Blue" but I cannot relocate it or find it in the worldwide catalogue. Does this ring a bell with anyone? If so, I'd really like to verify the title so I can replace my copy that "wandered by itself" out of my office. Maurice

The Pilot's Notes for the Grumman Martlet II state that the standard Sutton Harness was fitted, including the T-handle to release the harness to allow the pilot to lean forward. For the purposes of the three cockpit illustrations, the seat was removed. There is no slot visible in the short bulkhead that fills the spine behind the seat, either, the top of the seat (assuming it's similar to that fitted in US machines) would come well above the bulkhead's lowest point, and the familiar bar on US machines that was added when the US Navy adopted shoulder belts is not present. Are there any images out there showing how the harness was fitted? All help much appreciated. Maurice

Wez, Yes (or Mk.IX). Maurice

Wez, A very important difference is that the Seafire XV had an enlarged port oil cooler that matched the existing large starboard unit, whereas the Spitfire XII retained the earlier narrow oil cooler from the Mk. I-V series. Seafire XV's used at least two different enlarged rudders and later units had a sting arrester hook under the rudder. A small number of the very late Seafire XV aircraft also had the enlarged fin of the Spitfire XIV/XVIII/XIX series. Maurice

A follow-up - the Blackburn data specifically indicate that Corsair IVs were equipped with Q harnesses. Maurice

The vast majority (if not all) the FAA modifications to Corsairs (and Avengers and Hellcats) were indeed conducted by Blackburn, but not in the UK. Blackburn set up a modification centre on Long Island and made the changes there. Furthermore, the clipped wings for Corsairs came to Vought, Brewster, and Goodyear ready-clipped from their subcontractors. (The records confirming this are in the Blackburn archives at Brough.) It follows from this that all Corsair II, II, and IV aircraft, wherever they were delivered, would have been modified before leaving the US. Maurice

Thank you to both Graham and Mike - I now have a handle on the spools issue. I'm still looking for the other information - does the Shuttleworth restoration have all its equipment? If it does, I would imagine that the answers would lie there. Maurice

I am trying to find details and images for some Sea Hurricane cockpit details: Location of arrester hook release handle Locations of controls for the various naval radio units Stowage for signal pistol and cartridges I also seek some clarification on the fitting of catapult spools to Sea Hurricanes. The addendum that describes special equipment for these machines seems to indicate that spools were fitted only to aircraft for use on CAM ships and that aircraft fitted with arrester hooks (for use on carriers) did not have catapult spools. Is this correct? Any assistance much appreciated. Thank you, Maurice