• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Navy version P51

E

Emil Frand

Charter Member
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]In September 1944, Mustin Field played host to trials for a very unusual aircraft:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]an Army P-51 Mustang which had been modified to evaluate its use from Navy carriers.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The program was given the name “Project Seahorse”.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]An early-series P-51D was selected: P-51D-5-NA serial # 44-14017 which had been retained by North American Aviation[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]was given the Navy Bureau of Aeronautics (BuNo) 57987.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]A tailhook was fitted, which required an extended keel line on which to fix the tailhook attachment point.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]A catapult hook was fitted on the fuselage centerline, just forward of the wing.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]To cope with hard carrier landings, the tires were replaced with special high-pressure ones.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The main undercarriage shock absorbers received increased air pressure to reduce bouncing upon landing.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The airframe was also reinforced in various points to withstand the extra stress.[/FONT]​



[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Thus modified, 44-14017 was redesignated ETF-51D & sent to Mustin Field for initial testing in September 1944.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The pilot in charge of testing the ETF-51D was Navy Lieutenant Robert Elder,[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]an experienced naval test pilot who had already conducted carrier-suitability trials with several types of aircraft.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]One of the runways at Mustin Field was specially modified in order to test the naval Mustang.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Markings simulating the size of an aircraft carrier's deck were realized[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]and arrester cables were installed, as well as a launch catapult.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]During the months of September & October 1944, Lt. Elder made nearly 150 simulated launches & landings with the ETF-51D.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Sufficient data concerning the Mustang's low speed handling had to be gathered before carrier trials could begin.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The Mustang's laminar-flow wing made for little drag & high speed but was relatively inefficient at low speed, resulting in a high stall speed.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]As the arrester cables could not be engaged at more than 90 mph,[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Elder reported that “from the start, it was obvious to everyone that the margin between the stall speed of the aircraft (82 mph)[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]and the speed imposed by the arrester gear (90 mph) was very limited.” [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]By late October 1944, Elder had amassed enough data[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]and the ETF-51D entered the next stage: live carrier operations at sea,[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]thus ending its tenure at Mustin Field.[/FONT]​
more info and pics:
http://www.mustang.gaetanmarie.com/articles/naval/naval.htm
 
That too, I found this while reading info about an old airfield in my hometown from the 30s and 40s, Philly is nearby and I was stationed there for a spell so I read on about that airfield and this was included in the history. It amazes me to still be learning about stuff they did back then and having never heard about this before.
 
I hadn't heard of it before either. In hindsight, I'm surprised that I hadn't. It makes sense to utilize a single design for several different services. Especially one that is as good a design as the Mustang.

If they had decided to go ahead with it, I imagine the carrier-based P-51s would've received leading edge slats to decrease the stall speed. Perhaps, the Army would've looked at it to increase maneuverability. Possibly, it would've led to all Mustangs receiving leading edge slats.
 
The USN actually tested a number of USAAF aircraft. The P-51 was a dead end, but the USN did use a large number of B-25's, most went to the USMC as bombers and anti-shipping patrol aircraft as did some B-24D's. The USN also had some B-26 Marauders which spent much of their lives as target tugs.

The USAAF, likewise, tested some USN aircraft, namely the SBD Dauntless, re-designated as the A-24, and the SB2C, re-designated as the A-25. The F4U-1 Corsair was evaluated and was found to be a good performer, but was not adopted by the USAAF.
 
Lockheed proposed a naval variant of the P-38 Lightning to the Navy, but along with the water cooled inline engines, the Navy decided that it would be too large to operate on the limited space carriers. They later decided that the Midway class carriers could operate the F7F Tigercat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top