Control Line: Navy Carrier
THE WINNER of the Mystery Plane contest for the May issue was Bob Colton. Bob was selected from the eight readers who correctly identified the Brewster XSB2A-1 Buccaneer. Bob sent along a copy of an article covering the full range of Brewster bombers as described in my last column. Bob has a slight advantage over most of us in identifying planes of the 1930s and 1940s-he taught aircraft identification in the military during World War II. The good proportions of the Buccaneer haven't gone unnoticed. Tom Schaefer, a top Carrier competitor from New Jersey, has built and flown two. His accounts of them describe 350/365-point capability in Class I using an HP .40 on suction with a Perry carb.
Control Line: Navy Carrier
CONGRATULATIONS to Allan Wehman, Jr., who was selected from among those correctly identifying the Boeing XF7B-1 Mystery Airplane from the July issue. The carrier aircraft in the September issue is rather obscure. There was a single example produced for the Navy in 1933 and assigned Bureau No. 9377. As many readers have noted, the aircraft is similar to the YA-10 tested by the Army, but there were minor differences, especially when compared to the Army's A-12 production variant. The externally-braced wings could not be folded for storage, and the 44-foot wingspan was bigger than many biplanes of the period, thus causing a problem for carrier operations. Unlike its Shrike counterpart in the Army, the Curtiss XS2C-1 did not reach operational status and passed into obscurity.
Control Line: Navy Carrier
THE WINNER of the September Mystery Plane contest was Frank Beatty, with Evan Roberts, Ed Fort, and Gary Hetrick also correctly identifying this one-of-a-kind XS2C-1 Navy variant of the Curtiss Shrike. Unlike the mystery aircraft in prior columns, the XS2C-1 apparently does not qualify for our event, having been tested only as a land-based aircraft according to Peter Bowers' book, Curtiss Aircraft 1907-1947. When I submitted my column, I had two references to problems with carrier storage because of the large non-folding wing, but no actual confirmation of testing or intended use. Thanks to Frank Beatty for setting me straight.
Control Line: Navy Carrier
MYSTERY AIRCRAFT. Those of you who have noticed the absence of the Mystery Aircraft feature of this column (the last one was in the September 1984 issue) can take heart; once again, you have a chance to search through your files and libraries to try to identify an obscure aircraft. This particular design offers the high aspect-ratio and long-span flaps of the Guardian and the high wing and fuselage-mounted gear of the MO-1 all wrapped up in one airplane. Unlike the last Mystery Aircraft, this one is 100% legal for the Navy Carrier event, having been designed specifically for carrier operation. It didn't fare well in trials, slipping into obscurity when its competitor was put into active service. From those of you who correctly identify this aircraft, I'll select one name at random to receive a one-year membership in the Navy Carrier Society (and mention your name in this column, of course). Send your entries to me; my address appears at the end of the column.
Control Line: Navy Carrier
MYSTERY AIRCRAFT. The high-wing, high-aspect-ratio carrier aircraft in the March issue was the Supermarine Type 322, which carried the nickname Dumbo. It was built to specification S.24/37 as a carrier-based torpedo-bomber/reconnaissance aircraft. It had a unique, variable-incidence wing which allowed the wing to reach the very high angles of attack possible with full-span leading edge slats while keeping the fuselage relatively level for good pilot visibility during approach and landing. Because Supermarine was also busy with the Spitfire at the time, Type 322 was considered a rather low priority and did not fly until 1943.
