Curtiss XF15C-1 "Stingaree"

[Triton]

Photographs of the Curtiss XF15C from the San Diego Air & Space Museum Archives.

Source:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/page55/

 

[bercr]

Cockpit photos OF Curtiss XF15C-1 :

http://www.warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7222&p=59469&hilit=xf15c#p59469

 

[circle-5]

Curtiss XF15C-1 factory display model. This is the final version with the T-tail.

 

[VictorXL188]

Some pics of the original flight manual for the XF15C-1.

 

[Justo Miranda]

Some additional info

 

[SatinWings]

Photo I took a while back of the only surviving airframe, currently on display outside the Hickory Aviation Museum in North Carolina. I have a few more photos, including details, but they're stored on another device at the moment.

 

[famvburg]

Photo I took a while back of the only surviving airframe, currently on display outside the Hickory Aviation Museum in North Carolina. I have a few more photos, including details, but they're stored on another device at the moment.

Is this photo backwards or is the propellor pitched backwards?

 

[DWG]

Photo I took a while back of the only surviving airframe, currently on display outside the Hickory Aviation Museum in North Carolina. I have a few more photos, including details, but they're stored on another device at the moment.

Is this photo backwards or is the propellor pitched backwards?

Definitely the right way around, look at the lettering on the tow-bar(?) on the ground under the fuselage.

 

[famvburg]

Photo I took a while back of the only surviving airframe, currently on display outside the Hickory Aviation Museum in North Carolina. I have a few more photos, including details, but they're stored on another device at the moment.

Is this photo backwards or is the propellor pitched backwards?

Definitely the right way around, look at the lettering on the tow-bar(?) on the ground under the fuselage.

I wonder why they pitched the prop for left hand rotation then.

 

[iverson]

Photo I took a while back of the only surviving airframe, currently on display outside the Hickory Aviation Museum in North Carolina. I have a few more photos, including details, but they're stored on another device at the moment.

Is this photo backwards or is the propellor pitched backwards?

Definitely the right way around, look at the lettering on the tow-bar(?) on the ground under the fuselage.

I wonder why they pitched the prop for left hand rotation then.

Right-hand rotation but reverse thrust?

 

[famvburg]

Photo I took a while back of the only surviving airframe, currently on display outside the Hickory Aviation Museum in North Carolina. I have a few more photos, including details, but they're stored on another device at the moment.

Is this photo backwards or is the propellor pitched backwards?

Definitely the right way around, look at the lettering on the tow-bar(?) on the ground under the fuselage.

I wonder why they pitched the prop for left hand rotation then.

Right-hand rotation but reverse thrust?

Did it have reverse? I’ve never read that it did.

 

[iverson]

Photo I took a while back of the only surviving airframe, currently on display outside the Hickory Aviation Museum in North Carolina. I have a few more photos, including details, but they're stored on another device at the moment.

Is this photo backwards or is the propellor pitched backwards?

Definitely the right way around, look at the lettering on the tow-bar(?) on the ground under the fuselage.

I wonder why they pitched the prop for left hand rotation then.

Right-hand rotation but reverse thrust?

Did it have reverse? I’ve never read that it did.

Nor I. But it would seem a logical explanation for an unexpected prop pitch.

 

[Richard N]

It may just be a poorly assembled prop. The prop is pitched to turn counter-clockwise as viewed from in front of the airplane in all of the other pictures of the aircraft. I once saw a Pershing I missile with its triangle section fins mounted flat side forward!! Every frickin one of them!

 

[famvburg]

It may just be a poorly assembled prop. The prop is pitched to turn counter-clockwise as viewed from in front of the airplane in all of the other pictures of the aircraft. I once saw a Pershing I missile with its triangle section fins mounted flat side forward!! Every frickin one of them!

You would think a museum would do better.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

It may just be a poorly assembled prop. The prop is pitched to turn counter-clockwise as viewed from in front of the airplane in all of the other pictures of the aircraft. I once saw a Pershing I missile with its triangle section fins mounted flat side forward!! Every frickin one of them!

You would think a museum would do better.

It might have been done intentionally to make the aircraft non-flyable.

 

[famvburg]

It may just be a poorly assembled prop. The prop is pitched to turn counter-clockwise as viewed from in front of the airplane in all of the other pictures of the aircraft. I once saw a Pershing I missile with its triangle section fins mounted flat side forward!! Every frickin one of them!

You would think a museum would do better.

It might have been done intentionally to make the aircraft non-flyable.

I’m sure there are plenty of other things that make it unairworthy even with the prop pitched correctly.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

It may just be a poorly assembled prop. The prop is pitched to turn counter-clockwise as viewed from in front of the airplane in all of the other pictures of the aircraft. I once saw a Pershing I missile with its triangle section fins mounted flat side forward!! Every frickin one of them!

You would think a museum would do better.

It might have been done intentionally to make the aircraft non-flyable.

I’m sure there are plenty of other things that make it unairworthy even with the prop pitched correctly.

You never know with the FAA...

 

[T. A. Gardner]

One might note, that the XF15C was the last aircraft Curtiss manufactured for the US Navy.

 

[famvburg]

It may just be a poorly assembled prop. The prop is pitched to turn counter-clockwise as viewed from in front of the airplane in all of the other pictures of the aircraft. I once saw a Pershing I missile with its triangle section fins mounted flat side forward!! Every frickin one of them!

You would think a museum would do better.

It might have been done intentionally to make the aircraft non-flyable.

I’m sure there are plenty of other things that make it unairworthy even with the prop pitched correctly.

You never know with the FAA...

Does it have a civilian registration?

 

[Archibald]

It may just be a poorly assembled prop. The prop is pitched to turn counter-clockwise as viewed from in front of the airplane in all of the other pictures of the aircraft. I once saw a Pershing I missile with its triangle section fins mounted flat side forward!! Every frickin one of them!

You would think a museum would do better.

Depends. Whether it is considered an absolute priority, and a rarity.

Make no mistake: I know it has historical value... for us, aviation history buffs and nerds.
We do know its a Ryan Fireball rival and turboprop mixed propulsion fighter; one of the last Curtiss, including for the USN...

But a museum lives also for the general public, which has no clue whatsoever about all this.

Case in point: France Musée de l'Air et de l'Espace, the reserves at Dugny. Aircraft stored outside, even rare and precious ones (the Mirage 4000 was in poor shape before its brilliant restauration). Not because they don't care, just a) lack of hangar space b) lack of time and human resources forcing cruel choices in priorities.

 

[famvburg]

It may just be a poorly assembled prop. The prop is pitched to turn counter-clockwise as viewed from in front of the airplane in all of the other pictures of the aircraft. I once saw a Pershing I missile with its triangle section fins mounted flat side forward!! Every frickin one of them!

You would think a museum would do better.

Depends. Whether it is considered an absolute priority, and a rarity.

Make no mistake: I know it has historical value... for us, aviation history buffs and nerds.
We do know its a Ryan Fireball rival and turboprop mixed propulsion fighter; one of the last Curtiss, including for the USN...

But a museum lives also for the general public, which has no clue whatsoever about all this.

Case in point: France Musée de l'Air et de l'Espace, the reserves at Dugny. Aircraft stored outside, even rare and precious ones (the Mirage 4000 was in poor shape before its brilliant restauration). Not because they don't care, just a) lack of hangar space b) lack of time and human resources forcing cruel choices in priorities.

It isn’t a turboprop. Piston and jet.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

It might well be, looking at the pictures in this thread of the flying XF15C, that the prop isn't original to the aircraft, but rather one fitted because the original was missing. It certainly doesn't have the large cap over the hub that is in the photos.

 

[Archibald]

Drats, doesn't change the point I was trying to make.

 

[SatinWings]

It might well be, looking at the pictures in this thread of the flying XF15C, that the prop isn't original to the aircraft, but rather one fitted because the original was missing. It certainly doesn't have the large cap over the hub that is in the photos.

IIRC, the prop spinner was removed to improve the cooling of the R-2800 engine (much like the removal of the spinners from the XF7F when the design was modified for production).
Looking at other photos I took back then, I believe the propeller is mounted correctly but may be feathered (because propellers do not have a uniform angle of attack throughout their length, some propellers can look "backwards" because the outer portion of the blades may be twisted to such a degree as to have a negative angle of attack).
For those with the resources to know, I've also included the info table which gives the drawing and serial number for a Curtiss Electric propeller to check if the propeller is indeed original.

 

[Richard N]

Museums are a benefit of societies that have a respect and appreciation for what has come before. They don't operate like businesses that can sell products and expect regular cashflow. They survive off the charity of those who care about their existence which means that they don't have the funds to go out and hire an A&P mechanic and do the research to find the necessary manuals and documentation.

I would bet that the persons who put the prop together were volunteers who did the best they could with what they had and made up for their lack of experience with enthusiasm. There may very well have been no documentation and the people who built the airplane are long gone.

As far as a misassembled prop keeping this airplane from flying, because of its age and condition all of the systems would need to be gone through and overhauled and signed off on and that could take months to years. No one is going to get this airplane flying ever.

My guess is that the prop assemblers were people with enough mechanical skill to assemble the prop, but may not have been "airplane" people with enough knowledge to know that all the blades should have the same pitch in the correct direction.

 

[Archibald]

Museums are a benefit of societies that have a respect and appreciation for what has come before. They don't operate like businesses that can sell products and expect regular cashflow. They survive off the charity of those who care about their existence which means that they don't have the funds to go out and hire an A&P mechanic and do the research to find the necessary manuals and documentation.

I would bet that the persons who put the prop together were volunteers who did the best they could with what they had and made up for their lack of experience with enthusiasm. There may very well have been no documentation and the people who built the airplane are long gone.

As far as a misassembled prop keeping this airplane from flying, because of its age and condition all of the systems would need to be gone through and overhauled and signed off on and that could take months to years. No one is going to get this airplane flying ever.

My guess is that the prop assemblers were people with enough mechanical skill to assemble the prop, but may not have been "airplane" people with enough knowledge to know that all the blades should have the same pitch in the correct direction.

My (earlier) point exactly. You said it better than I would ever say.

 

[ACResearcher]

Very well said, Richard N.!

AlanG

 

[Airborne2001]

I remember seeing the surviving type at the Quonset museum when I used to live in Rhode Island. What a shame that the museum closed down...

 

[Colonial-Marine]

I remember seeing the surviving type at the Quonset museum when I used to live in Rhode Island. What a shame that the museum closed down...

Was that at or near Quonset Point NAS? I think I recall seeing the weathered old machine on static display at a few airshows there. When did they move it down south?

 

[1635yankee]

I remember seeing the surviving type at the Quonset museum when I used to live in Rhode Island. What a shame that the museum closed down...

Was that at or near Quonset Point NAS? I think I recall seeing the weathered old machine on static display at a few airshows there. When did they move it down south?

That particular XF15C had a pretty nomadic life. I know it was at the New England Air Museum, then at Quonset Point (the museum shut down after a weather-related building collapse). It's nice to see it found a home in another museum.