F2H Banshee

Now that is some interesting reading. I can only imagine how it must have felt to be in that first squadron to put the FH-1 on the boat for the first time.

On another note, I wonder if there was any rivalry between the guys who flew the Banshee and those who flew the Panther.

From Quonset Scout (Poop sheet for the NAS), October 27, 1948, Page 3

Quote:

First Jet Aircraft Squadron to Operate on Carrier, VF-171

All Jet Fighter Squadron 171 Housed at NAS Marked a New Era in Naval Aviation

By John F. Lambert, AMC.

Jets are in the navy to stay!

Have you ever wondered who chills your spine when a formation of Phantom Jet aircraft streaks the sky past the Station with just a blur of speed?

It’s Fighter Squadron 171, housed here in hangar 2, that holds the singular honor in Naval Aviation history for being the first jet squadron to successfully operate from an aircraft carrier.

With a compliment of 24 highly trained jet pilots and a versatile crew of 102 skilled maintenance men, Fighter Squadron 171 is commanded by Commander WN Leonard, a World War II pilot who received two Navy Crosses during the war years.

A new era began for Naval Aviation in July 1947 when VF-171 boarded the aircraft carrier Saipan. Some doubters said the jet would require too long a deck run. Others predicted the fiery jet exhaust would burn crewmen and damage planes parked near them. Aviation experts weren’t so sure that jet aircraft were practical on “flat-tops”.

It remained for VF-171 pilots to demonstrate and dispel any doubts that jets not only could operate in quantity from a flight deck, but could do it just as easily as any propellered plane.

It seemed that every pilot in the Navy was trying to get assignment to VF-171 – the Navy’s first jet squadron. Not all pilots could meet all the rigid requirements. Minimum flight time per pilot was set for 1,000 hours in the air and 50 previous carrier landings, before pilots could fly the “hot-rod”.

Pilots and mechanics of fighter squadron 171 began a period of intensive training and traveling for this thoroughly new type carrier operation.

Several Phantoms of the new formed squadrons put on the first show, on the carrier Saipan, being catapulted in rapid order. They came in for landings. The third plane caught a wire Just as the first was catapulted for the second time. Eight planes flew the next phase of the show, making firing runs and then a 500 m.p.h. high speed run past the ship.

Climax of the jet demonstration was the catapulting of eight Phantoms and the deck fly-off of eight more in rapid succession. In tight formation, led by Commander Ralph A. Fuoss, former skipper of VF-171, the 16 Phantoms made a close pass on the Saipan and headed for Quonset
Point. While making a landing circle, Commander Fuoss’ plane lost its tail section through mid-air collision and he was killed when the aircraft dived into the bay from 700 feet up. His death was the first Navy fatality in jets and the only casualty since VF-171 adopted the high speed jet aircraft.

The Saipan air show given by the Station’s most deadly squadron proved conclusively that carrier and jet aircraft were wedded into a strong fighting force.

The history of VF-171 is over four years old, and like a strip-teaser or show girl, it changed names several times.

Officially commissioned 1 April 1944 at NAS Atlantic City, New Jersey, VF-171 was originally designated VF-82 and commanded by Lieut. Cdr. EW Hessel as it began a colorful career.

After several months of training exercises and a shakedown cruise aboard the U.S.S. Bennington, the squadron was ready to meet their baptism by fire. This was it.

On New Years Day in 1945, the squadron composed of seasoned war veterans and a majority of new sailors eager for action, left San Diego to join Admiral Mitscher’s powerful Task Force 58.

As part of the fast spearheading task force, squadron 82 moved into quick action when assigned to make round the clock raids on Tokyo and adjacent areas. It subsequently supported the Marine invasion of Iwo Jima and participated in softening-up operations during the bloody invasion of Okinawa.

After numerous aerial strikes on Kyushu and Kure the squadron concentrated their hitting power on enemy shipping. The Japanese Battleship Yamato and smaller supporting ships were destroyed during this operation.

As the Japanese war drew to a close the battle scarred squadron returned to Leyte Gulf to board the U.S.S. White Plains for transportation to Alameda, California and recommissioning in 1945.

Upon recommissioning in August 1945 the squadron was transferred here in Feb. 1946 to Quonset Point to be part of the U.S.S. Randolph Air Group. At that time, the squadron was equipped with F4U-4 Corsairs.

On November 15, 1946, while engaged in a Mediterranean cruise, Fighting Squadron 82 was redesignated VF-17 Able, becoming one of the four squadrons of Attack Carrier Air Group 17.

With regard to its high record of efficiency, this squadron was one of the first to receive a full compliment of the finest reciprocating engine fighters, the F8F Grumman Bearcat.

The first two FH-I “Phantoms” were delivered to the squadron at Quonset Point on July 24, 1947. They were followed by other new FH-1’s, with an F8F being turned in for each “Phantom” delivered until the current squadron jet aircraft complement of 24 planes was attained.

After a period of jet indoctrination and familiarization in the “Phantom”, which is powered by two Westinghouse jet engines, the squadron entered its transitional phase of operations. Squadron pilots j investigated high speed, high altitude flight – singly and in tactical formation work. Constant studies were made of the best flight procedures for range and endurance, fuel consumption being high in all jet aircraft.

In anticipation of the fact that tomorrow’s air battles will be fought at very high altitudes over the top of weather and out of sight of the earth, much emphasis has been placed on jet instrument flying, including the Ground Controlled Approach blind landing system, and radio navigation. In all this work the FH-1 has the admiration of all VF-171 pilots and the men who keep the Phantom flying.

End Quote

An early FH-1 pilot was likely to receive a large certificate, about 18″x24″ declaring him to be “Phantom Jockey” from McDonnell Corp. The early F2H pilot might receive a similar certificate declaring him to be a “Banshee Bangster”

Here’s a VF-171 patch from those days

And an article from the Norfolk, Virginia “Norfolk Ledger-Dispatch” July 9, 1949, page 9:

“Takes No Superman to Fly Jet Fighters – Two Veteran Navy Pilots Convinced New Planes Easier and Safer, Too” – By Herald Latham

You don’t have to be a superman to fly jet propelled airplanes. At least, no more so than to fly any combat plane.

That is the sentiment of a man who should know – Commander W. N. Leonard, USN, commanding officer of the Navy Fighter Squadron VF-171, one of the Navy’s two operational jet squadrons. During his 11 years in the Navy, Leonard has amassed a total of more than 2,300 hours flight time. Most of it has been in fighter planes. He has flown jets for several hundred hours during the slightly more than three years the Navy has had them. He has flown from the decks of aircraft carriers and from operational land bases.
Leonard’s opinion is seconded by another flier who demands a healthy respect. Lt. Comdr. W. B. “Wild Bill” Biggers, USN, executive officer of VF-171, says the same thing. Biggers is a veteran of 3,500 hours flight time and has been in the Navy for about eight and a half years.

Too Old to Fly – According to armchair critics these men are too old to be flying fighter planes, even conventional types, much less the hot jets. Leonard is 33 and Biggers is 29. They agree, however, that insofar as the mechanics of flying is concerned, the jet is easier to fly that the conventional reciprocating engine powered airplane.

“Why then,” they were asked, “is it that the public and pilots who have never flown jets think it is so hard?”

They explained it this way: Aside from a publicity stunt to attract adventuresome young men into military flying, the opinion that a jet is a ‘hot’ plane has been built up because it is probably the most publicized flying machine in history.

Classified Hush Hush – The jet has been classified as “hush hush” by high military officials. That puts the public’s imagination to work. Man is prone to exaggerate, so you get the feeling that super-natural powers are a prerequisite to jet flying.

Then too, Biggers and Leonard continued, when a pilot is transferred from conventional planes to jets he thinks of himself as a student pilot once more. As a student progresses from one type of plan to a more advanced one, he is confronted with more speed, more difficult flying conditions and has to conquer more “musts” in precision flying.

Actually, the hard thing about breaking a new pilot in on jets is that you have to convince them that jets are more simple than any plane he has ever flown before.

“Just what do you mean by simple?”

“Well,” Biggers said, “it’s like this. The jet cockpit is much more simple. It does not have near the number of engine instruments and gauges the older planes have. Engine instruments are the major worry for pilots at the crucial moments of taking off and landing.”

“You don’t have the trouble with engine torque when full power is suddenly applied. Since the engine is almost vibration free, the pilot is not subjected to fatigue as in reciprocating engine powered planes,” added Leonard.

Torque, as explained by Biggers is the tendency of an airplane to rotate on its longitudinal axis when full power is suddenly applied. It is caused by the propeller acting as a brake in the acceleration of the engine and thus the left wing f the plane is forced down if the engine rotates to the right. When the left wing of plane falls at extremely low altitudes, a crash might result.

Alert All The Time – “The big trouble with jets is that you have to be on the alert all the time,” Leonard said. “Jets travel at such high speed that a slight miscalculation in navigation will result in your being miles off your course or beyond your destination.”

“For example. You’re flying from here to Washington. A conventional fighter will make if in about 45 minutes. A jet will get there in 20 minutes. If the jet pilot has doped off he will be lost. The conventional fighter can dope off and still not be in too much trouble since he has more time to make a correction.”

“How does the jets higher landing speed affect its use as a carrier plane?”

“From my experience, Leonard answered, “It is the best carrier plane ever built.”

He said a jet could be “put down” exactly where you wanted it to go. The higher landing speed is counter-acted by increasing the tension on the wires that catch the plane to slow and stop it.

Leonard said high naval officials were apprehensive when jets were first flown from the decks of carriers. They were afraid the high speed and heavier weight would “bust” the jets as carrier based planes.

Now, Leonard continued, they are as much for the jets as the old “battle wagon” admirals were for battleships.

Pilot Training Not Difficult – “As an operational fighter plane does the jet offer any trouble to new jet fighters?”

“No,” was the emphatic answer. “It’s just a matter of fundamental intelligence. If a pilot flies the way he was taught to fly in the first place, he should have no trouble handling the jet,” Leonard said.

“Of course,” he continued, “the jet has opened a new field of aviation to the Navy. For that reason, we, the Navy, have been slow in converting to the jet fighter planes in comparison to the way the Air Force has converted. Heretofore, the Navy has stayed below or around the 15,000-foot altitude for fighter planes. Now, with the jet and the new tactics called for by them we can go up to a service ceiling of above 40,000 feet with the F2H ‘Banshee.’” (One of the planes the Navy has offered to pit against the Air Force’s giant B-36.)

“Since the Navy is having to develop new tactics, we have used only chosen experienced pilots for the new jets. When these tactics are completed, these men will be designated to other squadrons to help with their organization when they are equipped with jets.”

“Do you think you could pick, say, six brand new pilots from Pensacola (the Navy’s student pilot school) and make them into jet pilots just as easily as pilots of conventional airplanes?”

“I certainly do,” Biggers answered.

“Even to take them to carriers from operations there?”

“Yes, during the many months we have been operating from carriers, we have not had one fatal crash or a crash that the jet was not able to fly away from. That includes carrier landings after weeks, or in some cases, months of lay-offs.”

What About Reactions? – “The public has been reading about the slowing of the reflexes of pilots at high speeds. Does this actually happen or does it just apply to planes of the future which will break the super-sonic barrier?”
“Well, I’d say the reaction to speeds over 400 miles an hour is about the same as below that figure,” Biggers said. “You might compare it to the increase of the speed of a car from 40 to 60 miles an hour. You’re going faster so you start reacting sooner, the same way you do when you approach a curve at 40 and then again at 60.”

Both of these experienced pilots summed up jet-propelled flying this way: “You get there in less time.”

Regard,

Rich

From what I’ve read, the Banshee was fairly easy to fly. I wasn’t the fastest airplane in the sky, but it climbed well, had great altitude performance, and pretty good range for an early jet. The bubble canopy afforded great visibility, and I think it had fairly good flying characteristics around the boat as well.

I never flew it though…..would be nice to hear from anyone who has.

Pretty Airplane

It’s definitely one with classic lines!
Pretty airplanes usually fly as well as they look.
Superfluous to mention the Spitfire and P-51 as examples.
How was the F2H from a pilot’s viewpoint?

Cracking shots, thanks. Looks like the aircraft are in excellent condition and really well cared for, and very nice to see the Banshees and Phantom.
Slightly of topic, is the P-5 Marlin still there?

Two Greens ?? 😀

http://www.airliners.net/photo/USA—Navy/McDonnell-F2H-Banshee/0180404/M/

There are a couple of close ups of the ‘intake’ pylons here

http://www.primeportal.net/hangar/bill_spidle2/f2h_126419/

As usual with aircraft a definitive answer is difficult,especially with different marks of the same a/c type,this seems to be a well written article…

http://www.vectorsite.net/avbansh.html

cheers baz

Phantom I’s are very rare. There are only three as far as I know: Phantom I (Bu.111759) on display at the NASM, and another, Bu.111768, at the National Warplane Museum in Elmira, NY, in addition to the one at Pensacola already mentioned.

Banshee’s are scarce too, but not nearly so rare. There are at least 11 survivors, perhaps more.

There was an F7U-3 Cutlass (BuNo 129554) under restoration to flying condition at the Seattle Museum of Flight’s restoration facility (Paine Field). I am not sure if it is still under active restoration to fly, but it was when I visited in 2003.

Cheers,
Richard

Here’s the rest of the pictures from my recent visit to the museum at NAS Pensacola.

FH-1 Phantom, F2H-2P Banshee, & F2H-3 Banshee

RCN Banshee

Just so we’re not forgotten…

(with a little editting to correct myself)

The Royal Canadian Navy acquired 39 former USN Banshees (F2H-3). The 8 hardpoint layout was the same, however, I’ve not seen any pics of the RCN Banshees in an armed configuration – however in RCN use, the outer hardpoints carried a rail for air-to-air missiles (from at least 1956).

The attached pic is the Canada Aviation Museum’s Banjo (note the total lack of pylons). I believe there is one more Banshee surviving in Canada at Shearwater’s museum.

James

Phantom II please post some more pics of your visit, I never get any further west than Lands End, so would be much appreciated!

Actually I think the inboard stores units were rated for 500-lb. weapons, but two was the maximum limit (probably on the two most inboard pylons). The four outboard four pylons were used for rockets (5-inch type I think) on the F2H-2 variant, but I believe could lift 250-lb. bombs (or rockets) as well on the F2H-3/4 variants although I believe rockets were usually fitted. (From 1958 onwards the AIM-9 was carried on the outboard underwing pylons.)

There is also a picture of a pair of 250-lb. weapons being loaded onto an F2H-2’s right wing on the two pylons under the intake ducts, which one would presume means the same two weapons were fitted under the same two pylons under the port intake duct.

Bottom line is that the Banshee has eight hardpoints, and in the F2H-3/4 variants it seems that all eight could carry 250-lb. bombs though I think that the inboard four (i.e. the four intake pylons) were usually only used for bombs (normally two or four 250-lb. bombs or two 500-lb. bombs). The outboard four pylons (i.e. under the outer part of the wing) were for rockets though the F2H-3/4 variants could carry 250-lb. weapons on them.

The F2H-4 had uprated 3,600-lb. J34’s. The Banshee’s thrust to weight ratio is actually very comparable to many other non-afterburning fighters of the time, including the F-86, F-84, F-80, etc. The Banshee also had the advantage of having a huge wing providing a ton of lift. It’s altitude performance was very good, and thus I don’t see it having too much trouble taking aloft a pair of 500-lb. bombs.

I’ve got some pictures I took of the two Banshees (F2H-2P & F2H-3) and the Phantom (FH-1) they have at the National Museum of Naval Aviation. I took the pictures when I had some time to go to the museum last week while I was on the base for some training. For anyone who’s never been, it is well worth your time and even though I’ve been there tons of times over the years, it is always worth a visit. So many great airplanes to see! I’ll get the pics uploaded when I get a chance.

Until then, study this one Banshee pic (F2H-3) I have time to upload now and perhaps we can get some good discussion on the mystery of the intake hardpoints….

“F2H-3 …. and racks were provided for two 500lb OR EIGHT 250 LB BOMBS” (my emphasis).

Chris

Incorrect, its weapon loadout was either 8x 60lb HE warhead rockets or 6x 60lb HE warhead rockets and 2x 250lb bombs, the aircraft was not rated to carry 500lb weapons and even at the combination rocket/bombload it was struggling.

cheif reason for this was F2H’s poor thrust to weight ratio, with a total of 6,500lb thrust and a dry weight of some 13,200 lb it was already in trouble, when at its nominal combat weight of 24,000lb you can imagine that with by then with the thrust to weight ratio at about 0.25:1 its really going to struggle just to get off the ground.

The Putnam says …..

“F2H-3 …. and racks were provided for two 500lb OR EIGHT 250 LB BOMBS” (my emphasis).

Chris

can’t find it now…

Too bad there aren’t more here. 🙂
A lot of 1950s U.S. Navy aircraft are rare, in part because of smaller production runs and many (Demon, Cutlass, Tiger, etc.) didn’t stay in service long.

I think I’ve seen just one Banshee, at Pima (they seem to have one of everything…but remember that until the late 60s, Navy planes were disposed of at Litchfield Park, near Phoenix, and not just across the road at D-M) but I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a Phantom I.

isn’t or wasn’t somebody restoring a Cutlass to (in theory) flying condition, read it in maybe the International Air Power Review before it went stealth…. jets of that period had a high loss rate compared with later models as well.

Great pity there isn’t one or two of the early USNavy carrier-bourne jet types on display in the UK.

Roger Smith.

Too bad there aren’t more here. 🙂
A lot of 1950s U.S. Navy aircraft are rare, in part because of smaller production runs and many (Demon, Cutlass, Tiger, etc.) didn’t stay in service long.

I think I’ve seen just one Banshee, at Pima (they seem to have one of everything…but remember that until the late 60s, Navy planes were disposed of at Litchfield Park, near Phoenix, and not just across the road at D-M) but I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a Phantom I.

Bridges At Toko Ri

is doing the rounds on Sky, Panthers are the main type but a few lighter coloured Banshees are on the flight deck – not a bad aviation movie at all, the flight scenes are well done as are the models compared with other movies of the time and since.

similarly, I think the Banshee a good looking aeroplane but know little more than the basics about it.

Great pity there isn’t one or two of the early USNavy carrier-bourne jet types on display in the UK.

Roger Smith.

I like the Banshee aswel, pretty for an early carrierborne jet. Unfortunately other than a basic history I can’t add much.
Are you sure about the hardpoints under the engine area, not rocket projectile pylons (had eight) or flares pylons for the recon version? Wouldn’t think it capable of lifting 8 x 500 Ib bombs, in fact I thought 1000 Ib was its total capability.

Ouch….