Barracuda Wingfold?

I have to confess that the Barracuda always struck me as an ugly aircraft. What do I know? I think the Gannet AS marks were good looking machines. No explaining some peoples tastes eh?

Here are a couple of photos of my grandfather, Victor Rance (the one with the gloves one), with some of his colleagues after Operation Tungsten. ‘Anyone know any of the other crew?

I was interested to learn more about the Barracuda, but I thought it look like it must have been a horrible thing to fly !

I didn’t know that. Strange how some countries are ahead on one thing and behind on others. As far as I remember from my assorted reading Britain was ahead of of the USA with steam catapults yet according to that they were behind in installing crash barriers.

The Grumman system folded the wings with the gun breeches uppermost.

Thanks, didn’t spot this before.

Incidentally, until late 1940 at the earliest, Ark Royal did not adopt the crash barrier. Therefore every aircraft landing had to be disarmed, folded and sent down the lift before the next aircraft could be landed-on. According to an armourer I spoke to they could do this in a couple of minutes. Needless to say, the American method was much faster and with practice aircraft could be landed on at about ten second intervals. No doubt the accessible breeches of the Grumman wing fold helped speed things up on the deck park too once the barrier was up.

The Grumman system folded the wings with the gun breeches uppermost, the Fairey Firefly fold system went the other way so the muzzles were uppermost. Of course the bind about this is the the access panels for them were facing the sides of the fuselage.

Indeed. However, which could be easily serviced and re-armed, when folded?

Serviceability was regarded as integral to the design to Grumman, and an extra to too many British companies. 😉

Fair point. I presume the fact that the Grumman’s wings are canted out more at the leading (lower) edge when folded means the gun bays can be better accessed – though wouldn’t they be upside down?

The Skua was generally thought to be pretty good to rearm and service, though the guns were apparently harder to get to when the wings were folded.

…Which looks remarkably similar to the wing fold used on the Blackburn Skua as early as 1937.

Indeed. However, which could be easily serviced and re-armed, when folded?

Serviceability was regarded as integral to the design to Grumman, and an extra to too many British companies. 😉

…Which looks remarkably similar to the wing fold used on the Blackburn Skua as early as 1937.

The DH Moth Minor wings folded the same way – lift up the inboard trailing edge and swing back and clip the tip under the tailplane.

As did the Fairey Fulmar, and the Supermarine Walrus. The Walrus prototype’s foldable ‘flap’ area originally folded down and around, before being reversed for up and over.

A tip of the hat to Grumman’s vastly superior and brilliant paperclip and two eraser idea of the angled hinge pioneered on the F4F Wildcat. Better design.

http://www.asme.org/Communities/History/Landmarks/238_Grumman_Wildcat_StoWing.cfm

The ‘aluminium origami’ of Marcelle Lobelle. The Barra’s wingfold is actually the same as that of the Fulmar, which looks a lot neater. The Barra’s profusion of protruberances makes it look much more untidy.

As for the Barra’s reputation, a lot of it was just that – reputation. The book ‘Barracuda Pilot’ by Dunstan Hadley suggests that pilots who had been trained from scratch on Barras did a lot better with it than those who had converted from Swordfish or Albacores, and the Barra’s rep for being unsafe came from a pilots trying to manoeuvre the aircraft in a way that would make most monoplanes bite. It did have a few handling quirks, but then so did many combat aircraft.

Let us not forget that the Barracuda could do two things for the Fleet Air Arm that it’s much vaunted US counterpart could not do – it could dive bomb and it could carry a British torpedo (The TBF/TBM, fine aircraft though it undoubtedly was, could not do steep dive bombing, only glide bombing, and its internal weapons bay was too short to accept the standard British ‘fish). The Barra’s results speak for themselves, as does the fact that a large number of Barras were built for the RN, more were built than Swordfish.

Later historians have done the Barra no favours – Norman Polmar suggests it was useless as a combat aircraft, which is very far from the truth and ignores the successes achieved by the aircraft.

The DH Moth Minor wings folded the same way – lift up the inboard trailing edge and swing back and clip the tip under the tailplane.

I recall seeing an article on the web … perhaps Cybermodeler or Hyperscale… in which the modeler produced a wonderful rendition of the Baracuda with wings folded – scratch built the entire fold area – all in 1/72… must see if I can find that article again.

Edit… found it… IPMS Stockholm… http://ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2005/10/stuff_eng_benshahar_barracuda.htm oh, and it was 1/48… but still sure I’ve seen it done in 1/72

The article you linked mentioned that 1/72 model you remember…
“The model captured my attention following the detailed work of Allan Yee on a 1/72 Frog sample.
…
Allan provided me with the technical drawings. Without them I could not accomplish this work.”

Perhaps you could contact this Alan Yee for more info?

It’s a real shame that we can’t find a little gold mine like this one.

Buried Parts

Or will I get flamed for bringing up the “buried aircraft in boxes” thought again. 😀 😀 😀 😀

Nothing near a complete one. There is a nose section on display at Yeovilton, and substantial wreckage in store there as well. I’ve had a quick Google, but haven’t found good pics – you might have more luck than me.

So, in short, possibly enough wreckage for a composite – one day!

Adrian

It’s such a shame that the military scrapped them after the war. I must admit that they’ve done quite a splendid job of the restoration of the nose section in the museum.
😮 😮

Is there any of these in existence?

Nothing near a complete one. There is a nose section on display at Yeovilton, and substantial wreckage in store there as well. I’ve had a quick Google, but haven’t found good pics – you might have more luck than me.

So, in short, possibly enough wreckage for a composite – one day!

Adrian

Hello,

Does anyone know how the Barracuda actually folded its wings as from the only photo seen, its seems to be a jumble of dive brakes and flaps?

Only asking for an upcoming model project and at this present time, details are a little hard to find.

Best wishes,

Martin

Is there any of these in existence?

At one point there were plans to put a jet engine in a Barra. Were plans drawn up before sanity prevailed – and do project drawings still exist?

Best wishes
Steve P

was it really a poor aircraft or another that history has been harsh on?

I knew a former Barracuda pilot, who always said he was mightily glad he never had to fight for real in it – he had a minor soft spot as something he’d flown, but otherwise wasn’t taken – he said the remains at Yeovilton produced very mixed feelings among his fellow Barra’ drivers, many of whom felt they were better off as tin cans!

I also recall that the late Lord Kilbracken (John Godley, I think he was in his service days) ditched in one. The place where the Admiralty decreed the navigator should take up his crash position was exactly the place where the fuselage folded in the resultant crunch… Luckily he had thought “Sod that!” and curled up elsewhere.

On the other hand, they did lay the Tirpitz up for two months… I guess you pays your money and takes your choice…

Adrian

I recall seeing an article on the web … perhaps Cybermodeler or Hyperscale… in which the modeler produced a wonderful rendition of the Baracuda with wings folded – scratch built the entire fold area – all in 1/72… must see if I can find that article again.

Edit… found it… IPMS Stockholm… http://ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2005/10/stuff_eng_benshahar_barracuda.htm oh, and it was 1/48… but still sure I’ve seen it done in 1/72

Wot JDK said. Looks pretty complex but actually quite simple – only two movements. All done manually.

I think that the stickie up thingies on the upper outboard wing sections locked into a point on the lower side of the tailplane?

Best wishes
Steve P