I find it interesting that this 1950s video proposes military uses when it seems that something like this plane would be useful for initial disaster relief in remote areas such as Haiti or Indonesia or Malaysia or right now the Phillippines. When disasters strike sometimes airfields are unusable.
aircraft carrier's get the air superiority. then use an LHA/D w/ LCAC and helos to land a BLT.
What you're discribing is the stand battle between the Navy and the Air Farce for years. As far back as the late '40s, the Zoomies held that there was no need for a Navy because they could reach out and touch some one (witness the revolt of the Admirals. good article on Wiki).
The Marines would need to choose a peaceful beach, not an Iwo Jima, Tarawa, or Peleliu where such a plane would be turned into flaming junk in a second.
Who says you have to land on a beach? The whole idea is that you can make a landing strip out of anything, so you're not dependent on vulnerable air bases. For example, if you're able to infiltrate airspace, you can land in a river and offload a mech force. Instead of having bases for bombers and such you can resupply them from moving sea ships etc.
@gosciu555: Unfortunately, no carrier based plane can deliver the goods and the payload that a land based plane can. Naval aviation is still VERY important for air superiority and sea control and tactical strikes, but for serious power projection in foreign lands, you need air bases.
It's a shame that none of these aircraft were saved for a museum. Same goes for the Martin P6M SeaMaster.
nev594 4 days ago
The best resource I can find says that only 13 were ever built.
US Navy transport squadron VR-2 used them (mostly in Trials) until disbanded on 16 April 1958.
1 Tradewind (XP5Y-1) crashed early in testing, the cause was judged catastrophic engine failure....subsequent to that 3 more crashed.
The Engine-Prop configuration and associated problems were never sorted out to the point where the planes were considered to be 'Operational'.
hammerogod 3 months ago
I find it interesting that this 1950s video proposes military uses when it seems that something like this plane would be useful for initial disaster relief in remote areas such as Haiti or Indonesia or Malaysia or right now the Phillippines. When disasters strike sometimes airfields are unusable.
exenrontexas 4 months ago
1:07 Sorry but no. Part of seizing an enemy's island airbase is denying the enemy the use of it.
NickB1967 1 year ago
Also, the sea state would have been pretty restrictive for this type of operation.
RJMooney1956 1 year ago
@gosciu55
aircraft carrier's get the air superiority. then use an LHA/D w/ LCAC and helos to land a BLT.
What you're discribing is the stand battle between the Navy and the Air Farce for years. As far back as the late '40s, the Zoomies held that there was no need for a Navy because they could reach out and touch some one (witness the revolt of the Admirals. good article on Wiki).
RJMooney1956 1 year ago
I've been wanting to see footage of this plane in action. Thanks for uploading this.
Setebos 2 years ago
The Marines would need to choose a peaceful beach, not an Iwo Jima, Tarawa, or Peleliu where such a plane would be turned into flaming junk in a second.
MrPloopy 2 years ago
@MrPloopy
Who says you have to land on a beach? The whole idea is that you can make a landing strip out of anything, so you're not dependent on vulnerable air bases. For example, if you're able to infiltrate airspace, you can land in a river and offload a mech force. Instead of having bases for bombers and such you can resupply them from moving sea ships etc.
gosciu555 1 year ago
@gosciu555: Unfortunately, no carrier based plane can deliver the goods and the payload that a land based plane can. Naval aviation is still VERY important for air superiority and sea control and tactical strikes, but for serious power projection in foreign lands, you need air bases.
NickB1967 1 year ago