The AD-1 Skyraider

[Shark7]

Actually this aircraft is quite impressive. And as there might be a few out there that actually flew the aircraft, I'm hoping to be able to get some accurate info on it.

Now I've seen photos of it loaded with 3 x 1000lb bombs and 12 x 5" HVAR rockets. I've also seen what appears to be 2000lb, 500lb and 250lb bombs.

So I have a couple of questions:

As it was designed as a torpedo/dive bomber, how many torpedoes could it carry on a mission? It certainly had the payload for 2, but was that practical?

Also, what was the typical combat mission load on a Skyraider?

[Terminus]

It could carry so much stuff, there was no such thing as a typical combat load. Would also depend on the era (i.e. Korea or Vietnam).

I doubt it could carry two torps and it certainly never carried any operationally.

[Shark7]

Since I'm looking at it in the WWII sense, Korea would be the closer period.

And I can see why it never carried a torpedo operationally, even though it was designed to carry them. By the time it entered service, Torpedoes were of limited use.

[Terminus]

An example of the ordnance dropped by "Spads" on South Vietnam in 1965 was a toilet. An actual toilet.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

An example of the ordnance dropped by "Spads" on South Vietnam in 1965 was a toilet. An actual toilet.

Hehe, I read about that one. Also I think one dropped a 'kitchen sink' just so they could literally say they'd dropped 'everything and the kitchen sink' as the cliche goes.

[Terminus]

I would think that the Spad would carry much the same weapons as its smaller cousins in the carrier air groups, just much more of them. Napalm and 250/500lb GP for close air support, 1000lb SAP/GP for naval attack.

[Commander Stormwolf]

Most remarkable detail is that the AD-1 could carry 4xtorpedoes (four torpedoes)


that is 4 torpedoes on a single engined fighter..
.. and betty carries 1 torpedo on 2 engines?

[AW1Steve]

In 1951 8 Skyraiders (carrying 1 torpedo each) attacked the Hwacheon Dam in North Korea. 7 hit , and the dam fell.

They could carry four (mainly for publicity photo's) "around the block" (in other words, a useless distance). It could carry two for a short distance , and one for a long distance.

The Skyraider was the most versatile plane that I know of. It could carry torpedo's,bombs , nukes, depth charges, and the afore mentioned weird stuff. It would be used for RADAR early warning, ASW, MEDEVAC, helicopter escort (where they shot down several MIGS in VietNam). I don't know of any other airplane that could do so many various missions.

[JeffroK]

Good coverage on Dan Ford's website, you might have to google for him though.

[YankeeAirRat]

Spads did carry torpedos operationally. VF-195 during the Korean War flew with Mk.13 torpedos (yes the same style as what had been used during WW2) to fire them against the HwaChon damn. Here is a link from the US National Naval Air Museum. Those were AD-4 variants but not much had changed between the AD-1 and the AD-4, the only other big change was the addition of special weapons delievery systems.

[Shark7]

Thanks guys. Amazing it could carry 4, even if it was only 'around the block'. Very few planes could carry 2 torpedoes, much less 4! [X(]

For the CAS role, would a load of 3 x 1000lb and 8 x 250lb sound realistic?

[YankeeAirRat]

Yes. During some of the bombing operations against the Bridges across the Yalu. Skyraiders carried a mix of 1000lbs and either 500lbs or 250lbs; or they went 250's with HVARs (for the flak suppression). The 1k's were to drop the spans and the 250s were sometimes equipped with delayed action fuzes to catch the rebuilding teams.

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Thanks guys. Amazing it could carry 4, even if it was only 'around the block'. Very few planes could carry 2 torpedoes, much less 4! [X(]

For the CAS role, would a load of 3 x 1000lb and 8 x 250lb sound realistic?

It could carry over 8,000 lbs of ordance. If it could fit on the pylons (or be tied to it in the case of sinks or toilets) it could carry it. It used to be said it could carry more outside then the B-17 could carry inside.

[sandman455]

Where are you guys getting this 4 torpedoes capability?

If I remember right she only had 3 hard points inside of the wing fold (left, center, right) which could handle heavy loads like torps. And honestly, I would be utterly shocked if she could drop one from the pylon hard points. Torps are funny, they don't hang like bombs so they usually have special rack requirements.

Anyway, you'd never put more than one on the plane anyway, even it you were attacking a stationary target like a damn. [;)]

[Shark7]

When it did carry a torpedo, would it be just the torpedo or would it still carry additional rockets/bombs on the wing pylons?

I'm also wondering would a 1 x torpedo and 2 x 300 gal drop tank arrangement be feasible?

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: sandman455

Where are you guys getting this 4 torpedoes capability?

If I remember right she only had 3 hard points inside of the wing fold (left, center, right) which could handle heavy loads like torps. And honestly, I would be utterly shocked if she could drop one from the pylon hard points. Torps are funny, they don't hang like bombs so they usually have special rack requirements.

Anyway, you'd never put more than one on the plane anyway, even it you were attacking a stationary target like a damn. [;)]

My source was a guy who flew the early version, the AD-1. He had said that they did it once for a publicity photo, but said he wouldn't have any range (hence his comment about "round the block"). He also said there was a problem with "firewalling" the plane on takeoff. He was always concerned that the torque would cause him to lose control of the airplane. I'm not a Naval Aviator. For all I know he may have been having fun with the interviewer. [:(] What I need to do is get my hands on a AD1 NATOPS.

[AW1Steve]

I've found a comment by Robert Dorr , who did the Osprey Skyraider book who verifies the three main pylons could carry 2k ordance each , including torpedos. Dumb thought. As there was a ASW version, could it possibly have carrier lightweight ASW torpedos? They'd be a lot lighter than anti-surface ship torpedos. [&:]

[JeffroK]

From the works of Joe Baugher
http://www.joebaugher.com/usattack/newa1.html

The AD-4 version was built in larger numbers than any other Skyraider variant. The AD-4 differed from earlier Skyraider variants in being powered by an improved engine, the 2700 hp R-3350-26WA. It had an improved windshield with better bulletproof protection, a P-1 automatic pilot, and a modified arrester hook. A pitot tube was added at the top of the leading edge of the the vertical tail.


Specification of Douglas AD-4 Skyraider
Engine: One Wright R-3350-26WA Duplex Cyclone 18-cylinder air-cooled radial engine, rated at 2700 hp for takeoff and 2100 hp at 14,500 feet. Performance: Maximum speed 350 mph at 18,300 feet, Service ceiling 23,500 feet. Combat ceiling 25,300 feet. Initial climb rate 2880 feet/min. An altitude of 10,000 feet could be reached in 7.5 minutes. Combat range 1250 nautical miles with 2000 lbs of bombs and 21 rockets plus 2 1050 gallon drop tanks. Weights: 11,700 pounds empty, 21,400 pounds gross, 25,000 pounds maximum. Dimensions: Wingspan 50 feet 0 1/4 inches, length 39 feet 3 inches, height 12 feet, wing area 400.33 square feet. Armament: Two 20-mm cannon in the wing. Three 2000-lb bombs, torpedoes, or drop tranks could be carried on the main pylons, while outer-wing stations could bused to carry 500-lb bombs or rockets. A maximum of 9900 pounds of ordnance could be carried in land-based operations, or 6500 pounds in shipboard operations.

[sandman455]

I looked around the internet a little and all I found was the same kind of stuff you guys are quoting. Not enough to support the insane idea of a 3 torpedo skyraider. [:D]
 
The big question is whether the rack on the outer pylons can be configured to the lugs of the torpedo which are designed to balance the weapon on the rack. Torps are much longer than bombs. Even that short, stubby pos Mk XIII was over 13'. Really need to see a NATOPS manual or better yet the TACMAN for the beast. And she was a beast. Someone said that a Betty could only carry 1 torp. Well this thing was almost the size of a Betty and she didn't waste the lift on lugging around another engine.
 
The plane is quite simply the best attack aircraft of its era, bar none.

[YankeeAirRat]

ORIGINAL: sandman455

I looked around the internet a little and all I found was the same kind of stuff you guys are quoting. Not enough to support the insane idea of a 3 torpedo skyraider. [:D]

The big question is whether the rack on the outer pylons can be configured to the lugs of the torpedo which are designed to balance the weapon on the rack. Torps are much longer than bombs. Even that short, stubby pos Mk XIII was over 13'. Really need to see a NATOPS manual or better yet the TACMAN for the beast. And she was a beast. Someone said that a Betty could only carry 1 torp. Well this thing was almost the size of a Betty and she didn't waste the lift on lugging around another engine.

The plane is quite simply the best attack aircraft of its era, bar none.

Sandman,

You want to hunt for this book, Douglas Skyraider by B. Jackson, publised by Aero Publishing in 1969. It has a picture of a NATC AD-4 Skyraider with three torpedos on the main section of the wing as a test. I have a copy of this book, but it is in transit right now to a new house. When I get a chance I will try and scan the picture and post it. They also have a picture of an actual loaded down AD-6 with about three times its own empty weight that NATC wanted to see if it could do as well.