Grumman Gander

[sequoiaranger]

I have now "completed" the construction of my Gander. Below are some preliminary pictures so you can get an idea of what it will look like when done.

I just realized that this is the FIRST seaplane I have done in some fifty years (since old Revell Seamaster and Tradewinds days in the late 50's). I had 28 seaplanes of various types in my model inventory, and had made landplanes out of several seaplanes, but never the other way around. Breaking new ground here!

I have painted the crew and will "seal in" the pilot, mask the canopy, and begin the primer and final painting coat phases. The gunner and gun assembly will come out until the plane is fully decorated. I will have to stuff something in the open canopy area in back while I spray-paint.

This has been WAAAYY too long in coming, but at least now the FUN can begin as the colors go on! Stay tuned!

[sequoiaranger]

Grumman ambitiously sought to displace Douglas as the major US Navy contractor for carrier aircraft. The US Navy was delighted with the biplane Grumman F3F fighter and its monoplane follow-on, the F4F Wildcat, but Douglas dominated the attack aircraft with the SBD Dauntless dive-bomber and TBD Devastator torpedo-bomber. Grumman was making inroads, however, with the superior TBF Avenger design that the Navy was considering to replace the Devastator. Dauntless replacements were proposed by Curtiss and Grumman as the SB2C Helldiver and the un-named SBF, respectively, while Douglas was trying to make a quantum leap to a combined dive-and-torpedo bomber (to become the Decimator/Skyraider). Douglas had nothing that would be ready anytime soon.

Grumman had charmed the Navy with its Loening-inspired biplane pedestal-float J2F Duck, and the Navy and Grumman were already looking for a monoplane successor with increased capability. Grumman designers had formulated a basic two-place attack aircraft that could either be outfitted with similar pedestal and floats as the Duck, or a "normal" fuselage and landing gear that was the SBF. Both featured fold-back wings and arresting gear.

Curtiss, though, was the first to have its prototype Scout Bomber finished and tested to US Navy satisfaction, and the Navy awarded a production contract to them almost immediately. The Navy saw value in the Grumman amphibian, but only had lukewarm interest in the SBF and would only "consider" permitting a limited number of SBF's for export to friendly countries. Somewhat disheartened, Grumman abandoned work on the wheeled version, and concentrated on the floatplane version.

The Grumman amphibian became known as "Piffy", for its designation as Patrol Fighter, Grumman, Export, or PFF (E). Originally it had a smaller engine as part of USN specification for a successor to the popular J2F Duck amphibian. Grumman, in a private venture, thought that a larger engine would be in the offing for either foreign or US demands, so designed the aircraft for the largest engine available, then used the specified smaller engine in the meantime. Engines could range from the Pratt and Whitney Twin Wasp of 900 hp to the Double Wasp of 2,000 hp (2200 in the subsequent Hellcat). Armament options ranged from light (one .30 in each wing, one defensive .30, and no wing hard points) to "heavy" (four wing .50's, twin rear defense .30 cal guns, and attachments for two 100-lb bombs or auxiliary fuel tanks.) "Dash" numbers signified the engine/armament option. A remarkable new feature was floats that folded outward to the wingtips for additional streamlining. An additional attractive feature that could be "custom-ordered" was that the wings could fold back along the fuselage (like the Wildcat) so that the now-named Grumman "Gander" could fit in boathouses or stored in pairs in small hangars.

The United States sought to allow independence to the Philippines in 1941, but wanted the new country to have a strong self-defence force. Several old British and American warships (mainly pre-dreadnoughts) were slated for transfer to the Philippine Navy, including the sister-ship to the US aircraft carrier Langley. Like Langley, the "PS Manila" was partially de-constructed to become a seaplane carrier. Part of the FFABDA (French, Filipino, Australian, British, Dutch, American) coalition's deterrent to Japanese aggression, the Philippine Navy wanted a floatplane/amphibian that could serve as a scout, light attack, or fighter. They wanted something like the present USN J2F "Duck", but modernized with monoplane configuration and increased power and armament. They also wanted something that could out-perform the current Zero floatplane fighter, known to be in Japanese use in China and the most likely antagonist. Grumman took on the task with US Navy blessing, marketing the aircraft to world nations, and presuming the US Navy would want something similar.

Many "colonial" powers, including the Netherlands, France, Great Britain, and Portugal, bought the Gander's low-powered and lightly armed version for utility duties in the Far East. To spur sales, Grumman offered four of their high-performance Ganders if eight of their medium-performance Ganders were purchased. France wanted to re-equip the seaplane tender Commandante Teste with capable aircraft, and took Grumman up on their offer. The high-performance Ganders would be the "fighters" that could escort the medium-performance "attack" aircraft. Ganders were on hand in French Indochina, Indonesia, Malaya and Timor. Ganders even showed up in South America and Africa wherever extensive waterways existed.

The medium-performance Zero floatplane fighter (later called "Rufe") was well known at this time, equipping numerous Japanese seaplane carriers and some Thai land-based units as well. What was NOT known was that though Japan was parading its seaplane carriers around for the world public to see, they were deliberately keeping the floatless Zero carrier fighter (MUCH higher-performing) to a low profile. Japan was also secretly working on their high-performance Kyofu floatplane fighter to supplant the Zero floatplane.

Eruption of the mini-war between Thailand and France in 1940/41 saw the Grumman Gander go up against the Zero floatplane in numerous small skirmishes. The French seaplane tender Commandante Teste was the centerpiece of French success at sea. The low-performance Ganders seemed to be equals, but the high-performance Ganders dominated easily with a favorable kill ratio. Japan came to Thailand's "rescue" with naval support and only through overwhelming numbers did the French Ganders get bested. Seeing such a clash of seaplanes would have had Hector Bywater's nodding approval. Japan took notice and rushed the Kyofu successor into production. Grumman got flooded with orders for the Gander from East Asian countries and colonies in a "floatplane arms race" as they began to modernize and upgrade.

The Philippines and France were the only Allied countries in the area with "real" seaplane carriers (PS Manila and Commandante Teste respectively), so opted for the up-rated engines, armament, and wing-folding. Even the US Navy was impressed and opted for several to distribute one each to its carriers. The plane was popular with the Navy. Powerful and agile for such a large plane, the Gander was only slightly slower than the Wildcat, and not a few airmen wondered what the plane could do without the cumbersome pedestal, floats, and second crewmember. Grumman also wondered, and had a few experimental single-seat prototypes built. The high performance surprised even Grumman.

Then came the war.

The PNS Manila bore the brunt of Philippine aerial resistance to the initial Japanese attacks. The IJN seaplane carriers Chitose and Chiyoda, equipped with "Rufes" and a few experimental Kyofus, took on the Manila and clearly dominated, but the Ganders accounted for nearly half of the attacking force before being overwhelmed. There were two instances of Ganders fighting Kyofus, each with a victory over the other. Land-based bombers sunk the Manila in the meanwhile, and the surviving Ganders made their way to land.

My model depicts the Grumman Gander "dash-5" of PS Manila's Air Group Commander, Lt. Jesus Tagalog. The red fuselage stripes indicate command, and the white wing bars on either side of the Philippine national insignia diamond are "allied recognition stripes" adopted when the Manila was sent into French Indochinese waters during the Franco-Thai war (Vichy French aircraft had horizontal white bars on either side of the French roundel, to help distinguish them from the somewhat similar Thai roundel.) Tagalog, an avian specialist and breeder, had the largest private aviary in the Philippines.  He not only deliberately made the insignia bars into stylized wings, but invented and applied the "birds and worms" camouflage scheme to his and his squadron's aircraft, adding dark blue-gray patches to the formerly monochromatic light navy gray paint scheme. The model depicts the day after his arrival in Cavite from the first air battle and loss of his carrier. It shows his two victories (a "Rex" and a "Rufe") and his gunner's. The following day his aircraft was destroyed by Japanese strafers.

Postscript: The F4F Wildcat was the mainstay of our carrier fighter forces at the outset of war, but was generally outclassed by the Japanese Zero. This was an ugly surprise, and the US Navy was scrambling for a successor. The Grumman successor to the Wildcat, the XF8F "Bearcat", was in the late design stages and ordered "off the drawing boards", but the US Navy knew it might be a year and a half from entering squadron service. The Navy needed something NOW if at all possible. In an emergency meeting between the Navy procurement branch and aircraft manufacturers some Grumman designers suggested that their experimental Gander/SBF single-seat prototypes could be quickly converted to a hefty single-seat fighter and production could begin almost immediately using the current Gander tooling and jigs. Though somewhat doubtful, the Navy gave approval to produce a couple of dozen fighter variants for evaluation. This conversion we have come to know as the successful F6F "Hellcat".

[sequoiaranger]

Go ahead and call me weird and demented--nothing I haven't heard before!

First pic shows some of the stencils I used for spraying. After a few "birds", I "standardized" and created several clones of the bird with a hole in it for the contrasting color. The part leftover after the cutout could also be used (same shape). The stencils themselves are numbered to correspond to a drawing with the numbers on them so they could be re-used in the same place if necessary to touch-up.

Then comes the "birds" part. As a paean to M.C.Escher's painting entitled "Day and Night", I decided to have one wing having blue birds on a gray background, and the other gray birds on a blue background.  I had painted the entire model the light gray base coat, then sprayed medium-dark blue-gray over the templates. I added the worms later to help fill in the "open" spaces between the birds, and to add squiggles to help break up the outlines.

The last pic shows the effect from slightly afar--WHAT THE HECK IS THAT??

PS--the long gray rectangle on either side under the cockpit is the "original" light-gray base color of pre-war monochromatic camo left for black-printed data that was left alone. The data will read "Lt. Cmdr. Jesus Tagalog, COMMANDER AIR GROUP MANILA". A square in the vertical tail (I took the rudder off so it would stay light color for the application of the red-and-white stripes) is similarly left gray for plane data--" PFF(E)-5  Phil. Navy.  I just wanted y'all to see the plane and the disruptive camo effect of the "birds and worms" before putting on additional markings.

[GTX]

Looking good!

Regards,

Greg

[kitnut617]

I really like that camo effect SR, very imaginative   

[sequoiaranger]

I Put the finishing touches on just now. I am more pleased with the result than I had anticipated. I was able to disguise my glitches with brain-dazzling camo and placement of nat'l insignia. Note the "tie-downs" on the hull that were printed Greek letter "phi" rotated 90 degrees. Weathering is very subtle. I kinda now wished I had done a wheeled "SBF" version, too, as I like the two-place-Hellcat look. The self-printed decals were a little stiff and thick, but I like the interest and uniqueness they add, impossible any other way.

A new decal "technique" I tried worked, but not without tribulation. The tailhook stripes are a strip from a US-flag decal, carefully wrapped around the tiny tailhook. Usually I just paint them free-hand, but I think this looks much better. I *KNOW* it would have been easier to have put on the decal stripes BEFORE I had attached the tailhook, but that's not how it went down. As it was, I had to carefully slip the decal strip between the fuselage and tail, and THEN try to wrap it around.

So here are four views of my first seaplane build in fifty years.

[Jschmus]

Outstanding!  I love it!

[sequoiaranger]

I was recalling M.C. Escher's painting of "Night and Day" featuring dark birds on a light background, and light birds on a dark background. I liked the blending, but couldn't do that on an aircraft. Anyway, if you are not familiar with the painting, I present it here:

[Ed S]

Great camo.  Looks good on the Gander.  Good job.



Ed

[dy031101]

I have elected to save the comments for the model's completion......

The comments themselves aren't changed much- the model is awesome!  So is the camo scheme.  I'm glad that we get a treat like this in the floatplane GB.

As a (unimportant) side note, about the backstory though, I kinda have a hard time seeing the Gander besting the Kyofu. 

[John Howling Mouse]

Fantastic!  This is really creative.  The armament, the float mods, the rear gunner---a very exciting scheme, too...very cool! 

Did you embellish the shadowlines in post-production or did that just happen when you took the outdoor pics?

Was wondering if you happened to test-fit the floats in the "retractable" position and managed to capture that look on film for posterity?

I know, I know: always with the questions, that Mouse-guy!

[sequoiaranger]

>As a (unimportant) side note, about the backstory though, I kinda have a hard time seeing the Gander besting the Kyofu.<

I researched the Kyofu/Shiden/Shiden-Kai, and I'm guessing the Kyofu and Gander would be about equal. The resultant Shiden-Kai and the Hellcat were fairly close.  The "Gander" has some 500 hp advantage over the Kyofu, but also has greater weight and bulkiness, so I figured that was about a draw. The lone Kyofu kill of my backstory was that of "my guy", the best of the best. Maybe my wording was off, but I meant to imply that one Gander got a Kyofu, and one Kyofu got a Gander. Also, the Kyofus in my story are being rushed into service, fighting its FIRST operational mission. The Kyofu was very difficult to fly, and had a protracted development. The Hellcat was almost perfect right from the start. The Ganders in my story were a little more seasoned than the Kyofus. So I don't think it is much of a stretch to imagine a trade-off in kills.

To all who responded, thanks for the kudos!

[dy031101]

I researched the Kyofu/Shiden/Shiden-Kai, and I'm guessing the Kyofu and Gander would be about equal. The resultant Shiden-Kai and the Hellcat were fairly close.  The "Gander" has some 500 hp advantage over the Kyofu, but also has greater weight and bulkiness, so I figured that was about a draw. The lone Kyofu kill of my backstory was that of "my guy", the best of the best. Maybe my wording was off, but I meant to imply that one Gander got a Kyofu, and one Kyofu got a Gander. Also, the Kyofus in my story are being rushed into service, fighting its FIRST operational mission. The Kyofu was very difficult to fly, and had a protracted development. The Hellcat was almost perfect right from the start. The Ganders in my story were a little more seasoned than the Kyofus. So I don't think it is much of a stretch to imagine a trade-off in kills.

Fair enough. 

[sequoiaranger]

A bit of "photoshopping" to render the Gander as if flying very low over.....dirty water?!!

With wheels and floats "up"--looking good!

[John Howling Mouse]

That looks awesome!  Thanks.