|
| In late 1943 Curtiss received a US Navy order for two single-seat torpedo-bomber aircraft prototypes under the designation XBTC-1. A clean-looking low-wing monoplane with considerable dihedral on the outer wing panels, retractable tailwheel landing gear and a 2237kW Pratt & Whitney R-4360-14 Wasp Major engine, the Curtiss Model 96 promised performance that should assure a production order. Before the first flew, a slightly different version of the R-4360 engine was installed in each aircraft, bringing the redesignation XBTC-2. However, Curtiss was now in competition with Douglas, Fleetwings and Martin for this requirement, losing out to Douglas and Martin whose contenders were produced as the AD-1 Skyraider and AM Mauler respectively.
In March 1945 Curtiss gained a contract for 10 of the generally similar XBT2C-1. This Model 98 differed by having a lower-powered Wright R-3350-24 engine, reduced armament,
accommodation for a crew of two and a search radar pod mounted beneath the starboard wing. Only nine of the 10 were built, and these were the last Curtiss-built aircraft for the US Navy.
| MODEL | Curtiss XBT2C-1 |
| ENGINE | 1 x 1864kW Wright R-3350-24 radial piston engine |
| WEIGHTS |
| Take-off weight | 8618 kg | 19000 lb |
| Empty weight | 5565 kg | 12269 lb |
| DIMENSIONS |
| Wingspan | 14.50 m | 48 ft 7 in |
| Length | 11.94 m | 39 ft 2 in |
| Height | 3.68 m | 12 ft 1 in |
| Wing area | 38.65 m2 | 416.02 sq ft |
| PERFORMANCE |
| Max. speed | 531 km/h | 330 mph |
| Ceiling | 8015 m | 26300 ft |
| Range | 2108 km | 1310 miles |
| ARMAMENT | 2 x 20mm cannon, 907kg of bombs |
| Joffrey Martinez, e-mail, 24.11.2023 20:57 Jerrylink Credit Group has made a huge impact in my life. When I was in college, I unfortunately had to rely on my credit cards to help me with my expenses. By the time I finished college, I was unable to pay back a lot of those debts. As a result of that I ended up with a very low credit score and quite a few collections, so I sought out Jerrylink Credit Group. They were able to make a huge impact on my credit score. It went from the 500’s to the 700’s in a couple weeks. I couldn’t believe it. With that help, I was able to do so much more, lower the interest rate on financing my car, and to get approved for a great travel credit card which has really helped us while planning our wedding now. It’s been absolutely wonderful and I’m appreciative because I didn’t believe this process. Recommending as promised, you can reach out to them via: JERRYLINKGROUP@GMAIL.COM or text 626 514 0620. reply | | goutou, 21.06.2011 07:23 The photo shows that the landing gear still sports landing gear panels. I think they disappeared on the -5. Getting photos on-line showing any distinction in the variants from -2 to the -5 are difficult. reply | | Alan G, e-mail, 05.06.2010 20:01 Bill Schultz, if you're still reading this site please drope me a note. Like to talk to you about the SB2C photo you have. Email is ag122651 at hotmail dot com reply | | Mark Murdock, e-mail, 09.02.2010 14:27 It looks so much like a Grumman Bearcat. reply | |
| | Bill Schultz, e-mail, 30.10.2007 23:29 Morphing the SB2C into the XBTC-1 seems to have some unknows for me.
It sounds like the inital request for the XBTC-1 called for the P /W 4360 and the use of the contra-rotating props. When that fell short...(probably the same bugaboo that killed the A2D, gearing problems)... the Navy came back and asked for a version with the Wright 3350. Seems reasonable.
I have a photo of an SB2C, possibly a -3 0r -4 variant with a very long engine nacelle from front back to the cowl flaps. I wonder if it was the testbed for the W-3350. It is not swinging a three blade /contra-rotating prop so if it was a testbed then probably not for the P /W 4360 package. Has anyone any ideas or comments about this possibility? If so, where can I find some clarification short of going to the C /W History Center.
The photo shows that the landing gear still sports landing gear panels. I think they disappeared on the -5. Getting photos on-line showing any distinction in the variants from -2 to the -5 are difficult.
Regards...Bill Schultz reply |
|
Do you have any comments?
|
| 
COMPANY
PROFILE
All the World's Rotorcraft
|
