Naval Fighters 66 - Grumman F9F-678 Cougar (Part 1)

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Grumman Cougar, like the Panther se ries before it, will be published in several volumes. This, the first volume, covers the Cougar's development as experienced by Corwin "Corky" Meyer, its structures, equipment and the Blue Angels. It just touches on the F9F-6P/8P photo Cougars and the F9F-8T two-seat aircraft as each will have its own volume in the Naval Fighters series. In addition, a large volume will concentrate on the Navy and Marine single-seat Cougars in squadron and operational service in the Fleet, Reserves, and at shore-based Naval Air Stations. ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Corwin "Corky" Meyer joined Grumman in 1942 as an experimental test pilot. He became project pilot for the following fighters : Hellcat, Tigercat, Bearcat, Panther, Jaguar, Tiger and the Mach two Super Tiger. In 1954 , he became the first civilian pilot to qualify aboard an aircraft carrier in jets. This was accomplished while flying with VF-61 in Cougars aboard the USS Lake Champlain (CV A-39). In 1965, he became Director of Aircraft Delivery operations, and in 1969 he became Senior Vi ce President of all Manufacturing Operations and Quality Contro!. In 1974 he became President and CEO of Grumman American, a commercial aircraft subsidery. After retiring in 1978, he became President and CEO of Enstrom Helicopter Corporation, Falcon Jet Corporation, and OMAC. Mr. Meyer is a Fellow of the Society of Experimental Test Pilots and an Associate Fellow of the American Institute of Astronautics and Aeronautics. He also served as a consul- . tant to the European research organization AGAARD (a NATO Committee for Research and Development) and NASA. Mr. Meyer has a daughter, Sandra Louise, and two sons, John Fyfield and Peter Corwin.

© 2005 by Steve Ginter

ISBN 0-942612-66-3

Steve Ginter, 1754 Warfield Cir., Simi Valley, California, 93063 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means electronic, mechanical, or otherwise without the written permission of the publisher. CONTRIBUTORS: Scot Bloom, Peter Bowers, Fred Freeman, Harry Gann , Hili Goodspeed (National Museum of Naval Aviation, Gene "Mule" Holmberg, Lloyd Jones, Craig Kaston, Clay Jansson, William T. Larkins, Bob Lawson, T. Matsuzaki, David Menard, Barry Miller, John Moore, Wayne Morris, Stan Piet, Mick Roth, Fred Roos, San Diego Aerospace

Museum, Larry Smalley, Bob Stolloff, William Swisher, Tailhook Association , Warren Thompson, Norm Taylor, Kirsten Tedesco, Gary Verver (China Lake web site), and Nick Williams.

Above, Corwin "Corky" Meyer prior to an F9F-8T test flight. (Grumman) FRONT COVER: F9F-8B BuNo 141140 configured for the long-range carrier Combat Air Patrol (CAP) mission with two Aero 150-gallon drop tanks and four inert AIM-9B Sidewinder air-to-air missiles. (Grumman) BACK COVER: Top, factory fresh F9F8 BuNo 144378. (Grumman) Middle, the National Museum of Naval Aviation's F9F-6 BuNo 128109 in the markings of VF-142 in 1999. (Ginter) Bottom, a row of eight F9F-6K drones at China Lake. (0. Olson via Nick Williams)

DEVELOPING THE GRUMMAN F9F COUGAR BV CORWIN "CORKV" MEVER

THE PANTHER METAMORPHOSIS

When Grumman and the Navy first discussed the Panther, both parties had been privy to the Navy Technical Team 's findings in German WW-II research immediately after the war and the fact that many of the top German fighter designers had "migrated" to our new enemy, Russia. This information put firm emphasis on the greater critical Mach number possibil ities with swept wings over a conventional straight-wing fighter for both the United States and the USSR. Therefore , the F9F-2 Panther straight-wing jet fighter contract awarded Grumman in October 1946 had provisions in it for developing a swept-wing version .

equipped with leading edge slats to see if handling characteristics and stall speeds could be made amenable to carrier operations. They put out a bid request to both Grumman and Bell Aircraft to get one flying in the shortest possible time. Bell judiciousIy proposed sweeping the wings of two P-63 King Cobras, one with leading edge slats and one without. Grumman proposed Design 77, a swept-wing version of the Wildcat, and an all-new aircraft. Both of Grumman's proposals were far more expensive-thus Bell received the contract.

Because the unknowns of higher stall speeds inherent in swept-wing jet aircraft and concerns about catapults and arresting gear capabilities of World War II Essex class carriers, the Grumman design crew naturally gave maximum priority to the straightwing version wh ich was by now under firm contract. Grumman also went under competitive pressure from McDonnell, whose twin-engine , straight-wing FH-1 Phantom I had been carrier qualified on 26 July 1946, and the more powerlul F2H-1 Phantom was not far behind. The Navy Bureau of Aeronautics, however, decided that the proof of the pudding would be in flying a sweptwing experimental research aircraft 1

Above, the first XF9F-6, BuNo 126670, just before its first flight on 20 September 1951. The three prototypes were modified F9F-5 airframes 126670672. (Grumman) Below, Bell L-39 (modified P-63) was a Navy-sponsored 35° swept-winged research aircraft with leading edge slats for carrier suitability. The yarn-tufted wings demonstrated visual wing flow to the pilot and the wing cameras mounted on the canopy just behind the pilot. The four-foot extension of the fuselage can be seen just aft of the wing fairing, needed to compensate for the large aft movement of the center-of-lift due to the sweep angle. (via Corwin Meyer)

Above, not only did Rolls Royce seil their Nene engine license to the U.S. tor use in the Grumman Panther but they sold it to the Russians who used it in the sweptwing MiG-15. The Navy's straight-wing F2H Banshee and F9F Panther (below) became instantly obsolete. The XF1 OF program was cancelled and the swept-wing Cougar became a priority. (Gordan Williams) Below, VMF-224 F2H-2 BuNo 123259. (via Harry Gann) Below middle, F9F-2 BuNo 122567 with tour bombs over Long Island in 1950. (Jim Hawkins via Norm Taylor) Bottom, the author Corky Meyer was the XF1 OF's test pilot. (Grumman)

On 19 June 1946, I flew a Tigercat to the Bell plant in Niagara Falls, NY and evaluated both of the Bell prototypes. My flight in the L-39, a swept wing P-63 with no leading edge device, was short. It cavorted like a cat on catnip during the stalls and required excessive altitude for recovery. The L-39 prototype with leading edge slats was docile during stalls and accelerated stalls. Both maneuvers could be performed with little wing-dropping and normal altitude loss. These two prototypes made it clear that slatted, swept wings would provide carrier-suitable flight characteristics and stall speed performance for fighters. I was soon to find out that the L-39 flights were only Swept-Wing Course 101. Efforts on Grumman 's sweptwing Panther (Design 83) langu ished because of the much higher priority given by the Navy to produce the straight-wing Panther in large numbers. Design 83, therefore, slowly evolved into a completely new aircraft with a variable-sweep wing moving from 13 degrees sweep for the landing condition to 45 degrees for combat, the much larger Westinghouse J40 engine with afterburner and unorthodox longitudinal and lateral controls. Grumman engineering believed this design to be the only solution that would guarantee sweptwing carrier suitability. It later evolved into the aborted XF10F-1 Jaguar. It was unknown at Grumman but the Navy Bureau of Aeronautics found out after the fact that Rolls Royce had sold the Russians the same Nene engine rights Pratt and Whitney had purchased for Panther manufacture . When Naval Intelligence determined in late 1950 that it was being installed in swept-wing MiG-15 fighters , the Grumman Panther and the McDonnel1 F2H-1 Banshee straight-wing fighters just coming into Navy inventory became instantly obsolete. Needless to say, the revised swept-wing Panther (Design 93) was now given top priority and Design 83, the XF1 OF-1, was temporarily shelved . A priority study contract was awarded to Grumman in December 1950 to re-energize

2

Grumman engineering and expedite the design of a swept-wing Panther. To make the Cougar a more straight-forward and produceable design, the Panther's fuselage , engine installation, wing center section, fin, rudder and landing gear were retained . The upper rudder was converted to a yaw damper that was required for the inherent increase in yawing and rolling caused by swept wing aerodynamics in rough air. The wings were swept to 35 degrees and hydraulic-powered leading edge slats similar to the Bell L-39 slats were installed. The Cougar's wing area was increased from the Panther's 250 square feet to 300 square feet to retain the same carrier approach speed as the Panther. The stabilizer was swept 35 degrees and was made fully trimmable for high Mach number flight. Normal elevators were installed . The first aircraft flew with a power operated spoiler flaperon and an aerodynamic aileron (in case of power failure of the flaperon) as a safety combination lateral contro!. Tip tanks could not be installed on the Cougar because of the far aft location of the swept wing tips. The resulting reduction of fuel capacity was somewhat made up by increasing the length of the forward fuselage fuel tank by two feet and installing bladder tanks in the leading edge of the wings behind the slat mechanisms . The total fuel relative to the F9F-5 Was decreased fram 1003 to 919 US galIons, giving the Cougar a range of 1150 nautical miles at 430 knots cruising speed . Because of its swept wings, the Cougar had much lower aeradynamic drag than the Panther, thus an additional speed brake was installed as part of the inboard landing flaps and was synchranized with the front speed brake. The flap speed brakes , however, were immobilized when the landing flaps were extended.

Above, an abortive attempt to eure stall pitchup on the prototype Cougar, XF9F-6 BuNo 126670. These fences, installed just outboard of the engine air duct entrances, and vortex generators installed at the 30% chord position at the wing outboard section, demonstrated no corrective air flow by the yarn tufts installed on the right wing outboard surface. (Grumman via Corky Meyer) Below, the second XF6F-6, BuNo 126672, with Grumman logo and AN/ARA-25 fairing under the nose. (Grumman via Peter M. Bowers) B6ttoin, belly view of F8F-8 BuNo 141143 showing the three long, slim black marks in a line which were the vent holes to prevent buffeting of the rear speed brakes when they were extended. The left aft flap speed brake has been outlined in black on this photo. The flap speed brakes worked simultaneously with the front speed brakes which can be identified by all the round holes located just below the engine intakes and behind the closed nose wheel doors. (Grumman via Corky Meyer)

A contract was finally signed 2 March 1951. Only six-and-a-half months later, on September 20 , test pilot Fred Rowley flew the XF9F-6 Cougar on its maiden flight. The first Cougars were delivered to VF-32 in November 1951, just one year after

3

the MiG-15 debut in Korea. It was interesting for me to watch the vast increase in interest and effort rapidly applied to the Cougar design after top Navy and Grumman priority was demanded by the Mig-15 introduction . Combat necessity was the speedy mother of Cougar invention. EARL Y PRODUCTION VARIANTS: Above, F9F-6 BuNo 128256 with wing fixes and nose fairing with AN/ARA-25. (via SDAM) Below, prototype F9F-6P photo Cougar BuNo 127473 in flight. Blow-in doors on the upper rear fuselage are open. The F9F-6P Cougar conversion was little different from that of the F9F-5P Panther. (Grumman) Below middle, all-red F9F6K drone BuNo 130828 at an open house. This aircraft started out life as an F9F-7, but was re-engined as was all -7s, thus both F9F-6 and F9F-7 Cougars were designated F9F-6D/Ks after conversion. (via Norm Taylor) Bottom, F9F-7 BuNo 130912 in flight in 1954. (Harold G. Martin via W. T. Larkins)

F9F-6 . Two flying prototypes (Buno 126670 and 126672) and a static test airframe (Buno 126671) were ordered with Pratt and Whitney J48P-6 engines of 7000 pounds static thrust with water injection and 6250 pounds dry. This engine was only installed in the first 30 production Cougars. They were later fitted with J48-P-8 engines rated at 7250 pounds of static thrust without water injection. All were armed similar to the Panther with four 20 mm cannon with 190 rounds per gun and the Mark 6 fire control system with the APG-30 radar range system . They also had two bomb racks capable of carrying Aero-1 C 150 gallon tanks or 1,000 pound bombs. Later aircraft were fitted with two racks for the AIM-9D Sidewinder air-to air missiles. In service F9F-6s were fitted with in-flight refueling probes and the UHF homing antenna in fairings beneath the nose cone. 877 F9F-6/7 Cougars were constructed with production ending in April of 1954. F9F-6P. Sixty F9F-6 airframes were fitted at Grumman with vertical, lateral and oblique Fairchild cameras and delivered as F9F-6Ps between June 1954 and March 1955. They were similar to the camera installation in production F9F-5P Panthers. F9F-6D and K models. Many F9F-6 and re-engined F9F-7 aircraft were modified as pilotless drone directors with various navy research and development programs. F9F-7. Grumman's conservatism was also reflected in a dual engine availability for the Cougar. The Pratt and Whitney J48-P-6 was going through some growing pains with thrust increases and manufacturing changes so Grumman Engineering

4

suggested and the Navy agreed that the AIIison J33-A-16 with its lesser 6350 pounds of thrust be installed in early production aircraft. These 168 aircraft were labeled F9F-7s. Grumman and Navy pilots aptly named these Allison engines "The Poopless Wonders". As soon as Pratt geared-up production with their 7250 pound thrust J48-P-8 engines, they were immediately installed in all the F9F-7 aircraft. During my carrier indoctrination with squadron VF-61 in 1954, the squadron only had Allisonpowered Cougars for all of our Field Carrier Landing Practice sessions, in July heat at NAS Oceana. During those practice sessions we were carrying 97% engine rpm, which left precious little thrust for necessary climbout during missed approaches. We were all pleased when the squadron was outfitted with Pratt and Whitney J48-P-8 engines with 1,000 pounds of additional thrust just before we went to sea for actual carrier operations. COUGAR GROWING PAINS: As the Senior Engineering Test Pilot, I relinquished the program of demonstrating additional external stores for the F9F-5 Panther to another pilot and was brought into the Cougar program to assist Fred Rowley shortly after its first flight. Checkout in the Cougar from the Panther was simple because the only change in the cockpit from the Panther was the flaperon/aileron lateral control system, wh ich had an automatic changeover to the normal ailerons if the hydraulic power to the flaperons failed. A temporary paper placard listing airspeed limitations was past.ed to the instrument panel stating that the maximum air speed was 575 mph, slightly lower than the Panther's maximum speed at sea level and estimated to be the Cougar's best climb speed. I stupidly assumed that the Cougar had already been to its cockpit placard limits. Wrong!

from the grip. I immediately closed the throttle, extended the speed brakes, and while decelerating through 500 mph, the buzz stopped. I landed immediately for a complete aircraft inspection wh ich showed no damage. I was then told that no previous flight had exceeded 475 mph! On my next flight at 525 mph my chase pilot noted that the spring tab on the elevator, designed to reduce stick forces, was a one-inch blur when the vibration was in progress. Upon landing, engineering soon determined that non-static balanced tabs, which had been used on all previous Grumman fighters, were required to be 100% static balanced when located on a 35° control surface. The balanced tab cured the problem by

As I was accelerating through 525 mph on my first flight, I feit a strong buzz in the stick wh ich was quite visible when I removed my hand 5

Above, VF-61 F9F-8s in 1956. Corwin "Corky" Meyer carrier qualified with VF-61 F9F-7 aircraft re-engined with Pratt & Whitney J48-P-8 in 1954. (USN) Below, the Cougar prototype XF9F-6 BuNo 126670 early in the wing modification program. The area just outboard of the duct had the two-foot sharp upper wing leading edge reworked to a more curved wing airfoil shape. This change was constructed of balsa wood covered with fabric and thus could be test flown the next day. It was the first fix in reducing spanwise flow and its ensuing violent pitchup at the stall. (Grumman)

increasing the tab's flutter speed weil above the Cougar's design maximum

limit speed of 650 mph . We had now matriculated to 35° sweep "U". The next problem that we found was that the small wing-tip ailerons floated at different angles during transonic dives without pilot input, so much so that the airplane was useless for gunnery tracking . We first tried installing small vortex generator vanes on the upper surface of the wing tip to smooth out the supersonic flow ahead of the ailerons, but they proved useless. It was then decided that the ailerons must be eliminated and the powered flaperons be extended another six feet to the wing tips. Above, leading edge slats extended on the second F9F-7 BuNo 130753. The slats were hydraulically actuated with wing flap extension. (National Archives) Below, 130753 with wing flaps extended. What looks like a short wing-tip aileron was actually a trim tab found only on the port wing . (National Archives) Bottom, the wingtip trim tab is seen deflected upwards and the outlines of the flaperon and the flaperette above the trim tab and below the national insignia can be clearly seen. (National Archives)

A SEEMINGL Y SIMPLE TEST FLIGHT: was again taxiing down the main runway at Grumman Bethpage for an easy flight test of spoiler-type flaperon extensions to replace the ailerons . The shop had bonded a twelve-foot sheet of 1/2" inch aluminum to each of the six-foot flaperons, hopefully to double the roiling capability of our new swept-wing Cougar jet fighter. I had attempted to fly this configuration the day before when I had a very eerie experience. I had been sitting in the cockpit after finishing my pre-takeoff checklist, when I had a feeling that something was drasticaily wrong , but didn't have a clue as to the problem. I looked down into the left cockpit console to go over my check list again when I noticed something off-beat outside the canopy in my far left peripheral vision . Now focusing on the left wing spoiler flaperon , I was shocked to note that the left wing spoiler flaperon was 45 degrees fuil deflection up with the stick centered!! I moved the stick right to bring it down flush with the top of the wing but it remained full up . I then checked the right flaperon and it was also fuil up and not obeying stick motions either. As I taxied back to the line , I was pleased that I had found the discrepancy. Had I started the take-off roll , the very high drag of the extended spoiler flaperons would have never permitted the airplane to leave the

6

ground. I was relieved not to have discovered the cause at 150 mph, tearing thru the village of Bethpage at the end of the runway! The inspection subsequently revealed that some basic and importa nt ground tests had been omitted by engineering in the rush to get this change into the air! I was told that my full deflection stick motions to check freedom of the controls had pushed the flaperon linkage over center and jammed them in the up position. As the flaperon system linkage was now corrected, tested and inspected to my satisfaction , I taxied into the takeoff position and fervently thanked the Lord for coming to my assistance the previous day in the nick of time. My check list now completed, took off uneventfully to make a full evaluation this new flaperon addition. About thirty seconds after takeoff the radio started a very high-pitched squealing and the cabin pressurizati on system cycled from minus two thousand to plus four thousand feet cabin altitude. I thought my eardrums were going to come out of my head. At the same time the aircraft started vibrating so strongly that the instrument panel was ablur. My mind was completely overloaded by this screaming, pulsating and vibrating monster in aircraft's clothes. The shaking was similar to a complete AIIison J33-A-16 engine failure I had experienced two weeks before when a large number of turbine blades departed the tailpipe, unbalancing the engine.

Above, f1aperon fully extended on F9F-6 BuNo 127325. The flaperon was hydraulically actuated for lateral control from the pilot's stick. (National Archives) Below, 127325 with flaperette extended. With hydraulic power out, flaperettes were "air bottle" actuated with only ten actuations for use in final approach or touchdown only. (National Archives) Bottom, the effect of tip stall on longitudinal trim shows the chordwise wing air flow after the three fixes for the initial pitchup and spin problems were installed on the Cougar prototype XF9F-6 BuNo 126670. During stalls prior to these fixes, the wing airflow would flow spanwise to the wing tip stalling the entire outer half of the wing wh ich moved the wing center of lift several feet further forward than this picture demonstrates. (via Corwin Meyers)

Instinctively I slammed the throttle aft and pulled up to a steep climb in case of my need to eject. I immediately turned the radio and the cabin pressure system off to rid myself of their part of the cockpit cacophony. A few very long seconds later the vibrations stopped and I found myself at 150 mph and 8,000 feet so I leveled off to inspect the engine instruments to see if I was in a Grumman engineless glider again. When I hopefully and gingerly pushed the throttle forward, the engine spooled up and the tail pipe temperature started climbing. After performing this simple motion

l

CG OF AIRPLANE

I , CENTER

OF ~.,....,.",--LIFT

7

several times I was convinced that my beautiful engine was operable so I looked outside. I found that the left 12 foot flaperon aluminum plank addition had come unbonded and departed the aircraft. Someone in Woodbury, Long Island, soon found a very large 1/2" inch slab of aluminum in their yard . After waiting for my blood pressure to come back to normal, I turned the shrieking radio on for a few seconds to announce that I was returning for an emergency landing which happily occurred uneventfully. My tortured ears gave me no urge to turn the cabin pressurization on again. This was the only time in my career that I had three unruly cockpit crises happen simultaneously. The radio and pressurization problems had simple equipment replacement solutions. The flaperon extension had fluttered and ripped off because the hinge at the outboard end of the aluminum flaperon extension had been made out of aluminum instead of steel. That event left the twelve-foot aluminum slab totally at the mercy of a 300 mph

tornado. The third f1ight test attempt with the flaperon extensions proved to be boringly uneventful. The extensions demonstrated a welcome improvement in rate-of-roll throughout the entire flight envelope. Elimination of the ailerons also greatly reduced transonic rolling tendencies that had previously made gunnery tracking unacceptable in that flight range. IMPROVING THE SAFETY OF THE SINGLE-SYSTEM FLAPERONS: Without the safety fall back to the ailerons in case of hydraulic failure of the flaperons, it was determined that the flaperons should have a second hydraulic system and aseparate smaller flaperon called "flappe rette" attached to the flaperon to have lateral control redundancy. The last three inches of the trailing edge of the full span of the flaperons were hinged to the main flaperon and supplied with a separate hydraulic system independent of the main flaperon system . Under normal conditions these two

8

systems operated as a single surface . When the main flaperon syste m failed, the smaller second hydraulic flappe rette system automatically became operative from the separate hydraulic system and lateral control was retained. Although this smaller system was not powerful enough to be used for combat maneuvers , it was sufficiently powerful to exceed the Navy requirement and provide a satisfactory 20 degrees-per-second rate of roll for all other flight conditions including landing aboard the carrier.

Below, F6F-6 BuNo 127217 with all of the final fixes that cured the trials and tribulations of uncontrolled spins and pitchups. The sharp leading edge from the duct to the fence was refaired. The wing fence is the final enlarged and lengthened configuration and the upper six feet of wing centersection surface behind the upper duct lip was refaired; all fixes to prevent early stalling causing spanwise air flow that had stalled the wing tips prematurely. (USN)

LANDING CONDITION STALL PROBLEMS:

The Cougar seemed to have satisfactory landing condition stall characte ristics for the first few flights while other more pressing problems were being corrected . On one of my early flights, I decided to look into landing condition stalls in accelerated stall fli ght cond itions, which would occur when lining-up for a carrier landing and flying into the turbulent wake of the carrier island structure. Carrier ai rc raft are required to have thoroughly tested accelerated stall characteristics in the landing condition to ensure that incipient spins were not possibilities . I was at 9,000 feet altitude in level flight landing condition at 20 knots above the ca rrier approach stall speed for my first check of this condition . I very carefully pulled the stick aft to force an accelerated stall , wh ich I estimated should occur at 1.5g. As th e ai rcraft pitched up , all of my pull stick forces disappeared and reversed! Even after applying instant fu ll-forward stick, the nose continued

nSlng as the stall progressed. With no application of left rudder from me, the airplane yawed rapidly to the left and entered a spin . I immediately applied full right anti-spin rudder. The Cougar was now in a fully developed left spin even with full anti-spin rudder and elevator control to stop it! I was no longer the pilot. I was a rider in this beast now and ag hast

9

Above, Cougar's outer right wing showing flaperon and flaperette outline. There was no trim tab on the right wing, only on the lett. (via Corwin Meyer) Below, underside of F9F-Sn during carrier approach showing inboard and outboard flaps and tailhook deployed. (Grumman)

outboard of the engine air ducts that were designed to give proper stall air flow characteristics, which were considered a normal solution for all straight-wing aircraft. At my now more motivated insistence , fences were installed and the sharp contour was refaired into anormal rounded wing airfoil leading edge shape.

OPERATING FLiGHT STRENGTH DIAGRAM -

-

MAXI MUM USABLE 8UFn:T

/

I

V.

/

,

./

V

I

I

/

~~; r-#/ 1/

..,.-

cJ' ~#. Z

o

3

I

;:: c( 2

~

/

U

U l c(

/ / . ./ Iv

•/T !Of' I.....

~-

.~

J

-

--

V I J

MODEL F9F -8T AIRPLANE

i

Clean Configuratton Gro •• weijbt 16800 Ib

.-

Symmetrical Clight S~thal f

Refer to fig\lre 5·3 for aiup.!ed limits .

I

I 1

,.#.

./

/./

V

:'/ '- ~

I

I

/

Rein to FIl\lre 5-S for limit accele r ation. at other CrO I'

.'

weightl .

'\

-2

-3 0.2

0. .

0.6

0. 8

1.0

1,2

AIRSPEED - INDICATED MAG! NUMBER

Above, the Operating Flight Strength Diagram shows the buffet boundary which is a function of the lower air density as altitude increases and flight Mach number. Flight can be attained above these lines but the violent shaking of the aircraft as it enters the buffet boundry is like a dog shaking water off after a storm, Nothing can be read on the instrument panel and the pilot's head and body are oscillating at plus and minus several Gs. (via Corwin Meyer)

at what had happened with only such a small aft stick deflection. As it entered the second turn I could see the little village of Oyster Bay, Long Island, on the North Shore of Long Island rotating rapidly directly below me. During the third turn, the rotation showed weak signs of slowing down , and after the fourth turn the the nose slowly dropped to the vertical and the rotation finally stopped. I immediately applied full power to pick up air speed and unstall the aircraft. I was staring straight down into the the main street of Oyster Bay only 2,000 feet below and now too low to eject. I then made as delicate a pullout as possible, being between a rock and a hard place-not wanting to precipitate another accelerated stall, but also not wanting to collide with homes of the

These two changes cured the landing condition accelerated stall/ spin control reversal problem. The tufts now showed that at stall speeds, the fences were stopping almost all of the low-G spanwise air flow and restored chordwise airflow beyond the fences to the wing tips. A satisfactory fix for stall speeds, but we really had not graduated from swept wing aerodynamics kindergarten yet. THE BUFFET BOUNDARY:

good townsfolk of Oyster Bay. My pullout bottomed at 300 feet over the city. I was totally washed out and during my recovery climb to 2000 feet I noted with great surprise that my landing gear was now retracted. I must have instinctively retracted the landing gear, subconsciously knowing that the tricycle-gear Panther and Tigercat had much less directional stability in a spin from the nose gear and gear doors when extended . I absolutely do not remember taking that action . The beast was now totalIy unfit for any kind of flight. Something had to be changed radically for me to fly it again. I returned to Grumman and landed in astate of disbelief and shock from the Cougar's God-given recovery from its first landing condition accelerated stall. In previous non-accelerated stalls, I had noted that the short yarn tufts on the wings (instalied to visualize airflow) showed that there was considerable spanwise stalling airflow promoting stalling of the wing tips . Because we all were neophytes in swept-wing stall aerodynamics, I had suggested the fix for this problem that the Russian MiG-15 had used, which was to install fences on the upper surface of the wing , but I had been overruled. The Cougar also had very sharp leading edge contours just

10

All fighter aircraft of that era could only maneuver at their designed 7.5G structurallimit at altitudes below 12 to 15 thousand feet because of transonic flow over their wings caused strong Mach number induced buffeting during pullouts at higher altitudes. This strong buffeting occurred at lower and lower Gs during pullouts as altitude increased and was called The Buffet Boundary. Pullups into the buffet boundary also showed an unacceptable reversal of stick forces and pitch-up. Tuft motions during these maneuvers clearly indicated that the inboard airflow was jumping the fences and causing the problem. In the first buffet boundary pullup attempt I made, the aircraft departed into an accidental spin similar to the previous spin over Oyster Bay, but the controls now reacted faster and recovery was fairly prompt with only a few thousand feet of altitude loss , probably because of the new wing fence installation . Trust me , accidental spins starting at 40,000 feet are much easier on the nerves than those occurring at 9,000 feet! Increasing the height and length of the wing fences partially improved the buffet boundary pitch-up problem, but we also had to re-contour the long

flat area of the upper surface of the engine air duct into a four-inch higher airfoil shape to cure its premature stalling to finally obtain acceptable high altitude buffet boundary pullout characteristics without stick force reversals . With these changes, wing tufts now demonstrated that almost all of the spanwise airflow jumping the fence was eliminated and became normal chordwise airflow. Complete outer wing panel stall , wh ich caused the pitch-up, was a thing of the past. The pilot could now release the stick at peak G and the airplane would reduce its angle-of-attack immediateIy and return to one G level flight. We had now graduated from high school transonics , but college finals loomed ahead. THE COUGAR FINALL Y GETS A FLYING TAIL: Grumman's conservative engineering has been previously demonstrated by the original aileron/powered flaperon lateral control system , which was proven unsatisfactory in transonic flight and had to be replaced by the powered flaperon system alone. In the same sense of conservatism , the Cougar also had a industry-standard electric trim adjustable stabilizer and normal elevator longitudinal control system for simplicity and reliability. This was a similar configuration to the original North American F-86A Sabre when it flew four years before the Cougar. USAF test pilots soon determined that the F-86A model Sabre must be equipped with the newer dual hydraulic powered system , all-moving stabilizer, dubbed "flying tail", for acceptable transonic and supersonic maneuvering combat flight. The trimmable stabilizer was much too slow to counteract the fast trim changes, and especially sensitive maneuvering qualities, required for transonic gunnery and evasive maneuvers. To fo llow up on the Navy evaluation request for better Cougar transonic control , Grumman sent the - author to Edwards Air Force Base to evaluate North American F-86E Sabre number 91849 on April 23, 1952. This was the first fighter to

have the highly-touted dual hydraulic power flying tail system installed. This instantly user-friendly longitudinal control system demonstrated that subsonic, transonic and supersonic flight could become smoothly integrated . It also demonstrated much greater combat maneuvering capability in transonic and supersonic flight. Upon my return , I heartily recommended it for the Cougar.

Grumman's conservatism again took over and engineering designed a single hydraulic system flying tail which, when hydraulic failure occurred , reverted to its original trimmable stabilizer and mechanical elevator control. It had some complexities that took a short time to resolve, but it was considered satisfactory by the Navy for the Cougar's long operational life ahead. Previously, the F9F-6 Cougar could be dived vertical to 1.2 Mach number, but it was work counteracting a lot of unwanted pitching during the the attempt. When equipped with the flying tail, it was most pleasant to reduce altitude by vertical dives , but one had to be ve ry careful that a supersonic bang wasn 't unleashed on an unsuspecting village below when the Mach meter hand jumped past Mach one!! A MAJOR PROBLEM WITH A "STRAIGHT FORWARD" DECISION PROCESS: With its swept-wing drag reduction , the Cougar was a much slicker aircraft to decelerate in the air than the straight-wing Panther. Its much lower drag effects were immediately obvious to the pilot when requiring speed reduction during rapid descents from high altitude , decelerating to join a formation or decelerating into the landing traffic pattern . To the pilot, the drag effect of the Cougar's speed brakes appeared to have only half the effect of the Panther's. I tried to persuade the Cougar Program Manager of my findings , but he adamantly insisted that they met the Navy minimum requirement deceleration specification and, therefore, there was no need for further discussion.

AVAILABLE OPPOSITE HYDRAULIC STABILlZER TRAVEL VS. MAXIMUM STABILlZER ELECTRICAL TRIM POSITION WHEN ON FLYING TAIL - 6- 1/2· MAX . AIRPLANE NOSE:- UP ELECTRICAL TRIM

POSITION.

. . --

o· _

-- .

- -_

--H/ t 2'::~::I: ~~v~: I~

THE AffiPLANE NOOE·DOWN

DIRECTION.

l....-- RESULTING IN A MAXIMUM OPP QSITE STABILlZER HYDRAULIC POSITION OF -2° AIRPLANE NOSE-UP.

4-1/ 2- MAX. AIRPLANE N05E-DOWN ELEC1'RICAL TRIM POSITION. [

0' -;---"=-=-:--:=::- -

-L

""-

.

----

-:..

6 _ ttl o HYDRAULIC TRAVEL IN THE AIRPLANE NCSE-UP DIRECTION.

-

RESULTING IN A MAXIMUM OPPOSITE STABlLlZER HYDRAUUC POSITION OF -2° AIRPLANE HOSE-UP.

aerodynamicist had come to the same conclusion as I had from his speed brake drag calculations, and he had completed a design for an additional set of speed brakes as a part of the inboard landing flaps wh ich would provide twice drag and give it the same smart drag reduction capabilities as the Panther. Knowing that Grumman had a solution , I decided to take the problem elsewhere to muster much more powerful forces for the "proper" decision. Unofficially, I called my old friend Colonel Marion Carl USMC, the legendary ace of Guadalcanal , who just happened to be the director of fighter flight test at the Naval Air Test Center at Patuxent, River MD. After

ALL-FLYING TAIL SCREW JACK ACTUATOR

DRNE

HYDRAULICALLY DRNEN MAIN

Y

DRNEN NUT

-+- H'~R.~UL,IC

I knew that the chief Cougar 11

.

MOTOR

could compete with MiG-15s during a very long, hot era of the "cold war". COUGAR'S RANGE DEMONSTRATED:

The Cougar prototype BuNo 126670 after it had lost the entire upper half of the rudder from flutter of a poorly rigged yaw damper actuation tab on flight 209. Grumman test pilot Ralph Donnell thought that the directional flight characteristics were worthy of furt her flight investigation. I flew flight 210, and although it had some improved subsonic directional flight characteristics, we found that its uncontrollable rolling and yawing in transonic dives made this ugly configuration unacceptable. (via Corwin Meyer) Below, one of the major problems with the Flex Deck idea was the handling problems of an aircraft with no landing gear. A dolly was needed to move the aircraft on the decks and into the catapult. The dolly stayed in place while the aircraft was catapulted. Think of the deck confusion with a lot of dollys hanging around between launch and retrieval of a squadron of aircraft. (via Corwin Meyer)

relating my "unbiased" speed brake conclusions, I suggested that he visit Grumman to evaluate the Cougar speed brakes. He flew up the next day and, after a short evaluation fight in the Cougar, commented to the Program Manager that the present single speed brake deceleration capability was unacceptable! The second wing-flap speed brakes were installed on all Cougars with no further resistance from the Program Manager. The Program Manager and I, however, didn't get along as weil after that event. The F9F-6 Cougar was now over its major teething troubles and was ready for squadron operations. It was too late for the Korean War but it did provide the Navy with a carrier-based transonic fighter that

r I

INCLlNED lH.JNCHEl FOR

FlEXOECIC AIRPlANES

12

On 1 April 1954, the speed and range potential of the F9F-6 Cougar was to be demonstrated in a very dramatic manner by making a three aircraft "routine" United States transcontinental flight in an elapsed time of less than four hours. Equipped with in-flight refueling probes, the Cougars took off from NAS San Diego on the 2438 mile flight to NAS Floyd Bennett, New York, refueling once over NAS Hutchinson, Kansas. The shortest time of flight was logged by Commander Francis X. Brady in 3 hours 45 minutes and 30 seconds, with Lt. John C. Barrow taking one minute and 30 seconds longer and Lt. Wallace (Bud) Rich taking one minute and 37 seconds longer. THE FLEX DECK A "BACK BREAKING" IDEA FOR A SOFT LANDING: Before the advent of afterburners for jet engines, which finally allowed carrier fighters to perform as weil as land-based fighters, someone in the British Navy came up with another great idea to increase carrier fighter aircraft performance. They postulated that if the tricycle landing gear and all of its commensurate structure and equipment were eliminated, a fighter's empty weight could be reduced about 30 percent. This 3000 pound weight removal would translate into a simple and stunning increase in Naval fighter performance. Their design called for a three hundred foot long bed of air bags five feet thick to cover the aft end of the carrier deck on which the aircraft would supposedly land gently and stop with the usual arresting gear and tail hook. After the aircraft came to a stop and the hook released, it would be pulled forward off the bag area and crane-lifted on a waiting dolly for the pilot to taxi this combination to the forward deck parking area. For pilot taxi control, the aircraft brakelines would be connected to the wheel

brakes of the tricycle dolly. It surely sounded simple on paper and was named Flex Deck. The Royal Navy rigged a Flex Deck installation at their Boscome Downs test facility and configured a NavalizedDeHaviland Vampire jet aircraft for Flex Deck landing tests. Shortly thereafter, the British proved to themselves that these tests might be great in theory but were found to be impossibly ridiculous in practice. The Flex-Deck was consigned to the British R&D trash basket. Not so in America. With solid indifference to recent British aeronautical history, the USAF and US Navy decided to have a go at the Flex Deck.

Above, the unpainted belly length ventral structure addition to the Cougar for the Flex Deck. It was installed to make the landing softer by not having the aircraft hit the Flex Deck as a flat surface. The ventral addition didn't work as advertised. Below, the handling dolly on and off the aircraft. The aircraft brake system had to be hooked up to the to the dolly brake system after every landing so the aircraft could be maneuvered on the decks. Bottom, F9F-7 BuNo 130862 after an arrestment over one of the joints in the 570 foot Flex Deck platform. You can see two of the 30 inch by 80 foot long pneumatic " hot dogs" which made up the landing platform. (Grumman via Corwin Meyer)

The Martin Company configured a straight-wing Republic F-84 Thunderjet with an arresting hook. The USAF set up a Flex Deck installation at Edwards Air Force Base in California and started flight testing this combination with an aircraft that had a 135 knot landing approach speed , 44 knots faster than the the Vampire's. I was flying the Grumman XF10F-1 Jaguar at Edwards at the time and witnessed two of the actual landings and an even more striking slow-motion movie taken during one of Martin test pilot George Rodney's landings. It was awesomely clear that when the Thunderjet "touched" down, George completely disappeared below the canopy side rails on every landing! During the program, both he and another Martin test pilot broke their backs. The USAF aeronautical R&D incinerator trashed their Flex Deck intentions shortly thereafter. After the failed USAF attempts at Flex Decking , the Navy couldn 't be left standing out in the cold of aeronautical history so Grumman was selected to perform a Flex Deck evaluation for future carrier aircraft performance increase possibilities. Norm 13

Below, tlexdeck landing sequence with L T John Moore at the controls ot F9F-7 130862, which had been re-engined with the more powerful J48-P-8 engine tor satety. (USN)

Coutant, one of our more gray-hai red test pilots, was chosen as project pilot for the program. He went to England and after making two landings on

their Flex-Deck rig in the Vampire, his maturity got the best of him and he declined further honor for the U.S.Navy. John Norris, a younger Grumman test pilot, flew several Vampire Flex Deck landings in England and "being less equipped with sanity" (his quote) agreed to complete the Grumman program in a specially-modified Grumman sweptwing F9F-7 Cougar. During his first Flex Deck landings in the Cougar, it became evident to him that the fundamentals of physics on the pilot's body were the same in all the air forces in the free world. A very special full-body harness was then designed to keep John's head locked up to prevent it from disappearing below the cockpit rails, as George Rodney's head had done so perfunctorily in the USAF tests. Besides this minor problem , it was abundantly clear to the Grumman test team that little thought had been given as to how these landinggearless aircraft would be handled and supported during the remaining 90% of their long life cycle when they were land-based at Navy airfields or when using USAF and commercial airports. John completed his contractrequired ten landings and was most relieved to collect his extra-hazard bonus standing erect and without assistance. To be sure that the Navy had not been hood-winked by their contractor, they requested Lt. John Moore, "a feeble-minded Navy test pilot" (his quote), who smartly requested John Norris' full-body head lock-up harness, to perform 14 more of these hazordous landings before the program was abandoned to the great relief, albeit it unknown, of all future test pilots and Naval aviators. In July 1999, the author spoke to both John Norris and John Moore to ask their opinions as to why the Navy persisted in such an expensive, harrowing, two-time loser and backbreaking program. Without hesitation, they both retorted that the U.S.Navy must have had a humongous excess of research and development money that they were forced to "Iaunder" by

14

the Brass during those idiotie years.

Above, a diagram of the area needed for the pneumatic Flex Deck carrier landing scheme tested by Grumman test pilot John Norris and Lt. John Moore for the Navy. This platform was supported by 686 30-inch "soft" pneumatic tubes. The tubes proved to be hard as rocks in actual practice. At right, Grumman test pilot John Norris garbed in his back-stiffening and heimet-holding rig that he needfully devised after flying the DeHaviland Vampire on the Flex Deck at Farnborough in 1955 in England. He and Navy test pilot LT John Moore used this rig religiously during Navy tests at the Naval Air Test Center, Patuxent River, Maryland, and were not injured. Four other pilots seriousIy damaged their backs in British and USAF tests of the Flex Deck system. Below, crane lifting the Cougar off the Flex Deck to place it on the dolly. The Flex Deck system should have been conceptualIy trashed without spending a cent after learning of the previous British Royal Navy and USAF problems, fiascos and decisions. (Grumman via Corwin Meyer)

100STU MANlfOlD

flflllU DfU mmCTIVE

15

n

~

co~

THE F9F-6 COUGAR MATURES INTO THE F9F-8:

In order to increase range and reduce carrier catapult and approach speeds of the F9F-6 Cougar, Grumman began work on the F9F-8 Cougar Design 99 in April 1953. The writer had the pleasure of making the first flight of the F9F-8-modified, experimental F9F-6 BuNo 127216 on December 18, 1953. The wing was redesigned to incorporate a fixed cambered leading edge to give the same lift characteristics as the complex F9F-6 slats . This available wing space from the removal of the slat mechanism, coupled with an 8-inch extension of the fuselage , provided room to increase the internal fuel capacity 144 US gallons and thereby its range from 908 to 1203 nautical miles. The F9F-8 Cougar now offered a range capability that was effectively restricted only to the endurance of the pilot!

The wing redesign also increased the wing area from 300 to 365 square feet and reduced the stall speed by 12 knots. This welcome reduction of stall speed aliowed the F9F-8 to carry a greater load of newer and heavier external ground-attack

\

16

Above and below, the first production F9F-8 BuNo 131063 with nose test boom and signature solid extendedforward wing outboard of the wing fences. The new UHF antenna nose fairing and nose-mounted in-flight refueling probe have yet to be added . (0. Spering/AIR coll. & Grumman)

Above, Corwin Meyer enjoying the delights of evaluating F9F-8 BuNo 131089 on a clear day near Long Island Sound. Aircraft has the UHF antenna fairing added to the nose. (via Corwin Meyer) Below, F9F-8 BuNo 141104 with forward speed brakes deployed over Long Island. (NMNA) Bottom, early F9F-8B BuNo 141143 in post-1956 grey and white paint scheme in flight over NAAS Chase Field. Most -8Bs did not carry the "B" designation above the BuNo. Nose-mounted refueling probe and intake splitter plate have yet to be added. (USN via Peter M. Bowers)

17

stores. The increased wing area was developed by extending the width of the wing, giving it less aerodynamic Mach number drag thus increasing the transonic and supersonic critical combat dive speeds by a welcome .05 Mach number. The F9F-8 Cougar now had th e in-flight refueling probe and the new UHF homing antenna installed in th e Grumman production line. Provisions for carrying two of the new Sidewinder AIM-8B missiles on each win g were also installed. The 601 F9F-8 aircraft subsequently produced not only had a large increase in capabil ity and but also now were much easier to maintain. F9F-8B: The Cougar was the first and only navy carrier-based swept-wing fighter wh ich for many months was able to carry tactical nuclear special

At lett top, A3D-1 tanker tests with early F9F-8. (USN) At lett, F9F-8 with refueling probe iIIustrates the type's cambered leading edge wing extensions which housed fuel tanks for added range instead of the very complicated and space-taking F9F-6 hydraulic powered slats. (via Corwi n Meyer) Below, Corwin Meyer in flight in F9F-8B BuNo 141215 in final configuration with intake splitter plate boundary layer bleed, which added significantly to the overall flight performance. (via Corwin Meyer)

18

stores on one of the two Aero 22A racks , the other rack being used for an Aero-1 C 150 gallon tank. When operationally required, they were service-fitted with Aero 18C LABS (Low Altitude Bombing System), additional instrumentation, and the required controls for arming and launching the 1,680-pound Mk 7 nuclear store . F9F-8P: This aircraft had a much larger designed nose section and a total of fourteen items of Fai rchild camera equipment in it, replacing the four 20-mm cannon and ammunition of the F9F-8. The first F9F-8P (Buno 141668) was flown February 18, 1955. The 110 remaining F9F-8Ps were delivered between August 1955 and July 1957. COUGAR SERVICE HISTORY: Although the F9F-6 and F9F-8 Cougars were designed as a stopgap rush job to meet the MiG-15 menace of the Korean War, no Cougar aircraft were to be available in Korea before the ceasefire in 1953.

The Cougar was first introduced to squadron operations by VF-32 in November 1952. Because of Grumman's production capability and the F9F-6/7 Cougar's pleasant flight qualities in carrier operations, no fewer than 20 fighter squadrons were reequipped in the following year. Eight of these squadrons were subsequentIy converted to the F9F-8. Seven additional fighter squadrons not previously flying Cougars were also assigned to the F9F-8. In addition , four Navy attack squadrons were equipped with Cougars before converting to the Douglas A4D Skyhawk. Five additional reconnaissance squadrons were equipped with the F9F-6P and F9F-8P photographie version of the Cougar. By the mid1950s, Cougars were by far the most

At top right, F9F-8B BuNo 131249 swept-wing nuclear bomber from VMA311. (USMC) Above right, F9F-6 BuNo 127216 seen here on 19 February 1955 became one of two prototype F9F-8P aircraft. (via Peter M. Bowers) At right, the first production F9F-8P BuNo 141668 without refueling probe on an early test flight. (Grumman via Peter M. Bowers)

19

numerous fighters in Navy inventory. Cougar fighters were phased out of both the Atlantic and Pacific Fleets by 1959 in favor of the Grumman F11 F-1 Tiger and the Chance Vought F8U-1 Crusader. The F9F-8P photoreconnaissance aircraft remained in fleet inventory until the mid-1960s. As the Cougars came out of Navy operational squadrons, they were placed in 23 Naval and Marine reserve squadrons at 11 Naval Air Stations around the country. They, too, remained in this duty until the mid-1960s. Above, in November 1952, VF-32 was the first squadron to equip with the sweptwing Cougar. (USN) Below, two views of the prototype F9F-8T BuNo 141667, an F9F-8 remanufactured into the Navy's first swept-wing trainer. Top photo was during initial testing in a standard grey and white scheme; the lower view shows it repainted in orange and white Training Command colors and equipped with tour Sidewinder missiles. (via Corwin Meyer) BoUom, the second production F9F-8T BuNo 142438 in 1956. The F9F-8T was the first U.S. military aircraft to have the zero speed at sea level English-designed Martin-Baker ejection seats installed. (via Corwin Meyer)

AND LATEST BUT NOT LEAST, THE F9F-8T TRAINER: Because of the operational accident rate of swept-wing aircraft, Grumman beg an development of a two-seat trainer version in November 1953 as Design 105 to meet anticipated carrier training requirements . Grumman was in competition with the popular Lockheed TV-1 and T2V, straight-wing trainer versions of the USAF F-80 that had been in the Navy Training Command for years. After much salesmanship, Grumman was authorized by the Navy to redesign an F9F-8 airframe (Buno 141667) as a two-seat prototype . It flew on February 29 , 1956. The failure of the T2V to meet its requirements later boosted the production numbers of the F9F-8T to 399 aircraft produced between July 1956 and February 1960. To provide space for the second cockpit, the fuselage was extended 34 inches. The additional secon d cockpit space also required that the size of the forward fuselage tank be reduced, giving the F9F-8T 296 galIons less than the standard F9F-8 fighter. A rear-sliding canopy was instalied and the rear cockpit was given a very strong windshield to deflect the air blast when the canopy was blown off during the crew ejection cycle. To keep the empty weight close to that of the F9F-8, two of the four 20 mm cannon and their ammunition were removed. Provisions for a nose in-flight refueling boom and fou r under-wing Sidewinder missile sta-

20

tions were incorporated . The five F9F-8T Cougar squadrons had a splendid 17-year career with the Naval Training Command until the aircraft were finalIy phased-out by VT-4, the last operational squadron, in February 1974. They proved vital in training pilots who flew combat from carriers in the Vietnam War. THE DAMNEDEST LASTEST OF THE F9F SERIES-THE F9F-9: After successfully modifying the straight-wing F9F-2 Panther into the Navy's first swept-wing, carrier-based fighter, a Grumman team lead by Joe Gavin, coupled with the Navy Bureau of Aeronautics Fighter Desk, decided to investigate the further improvement of the the F9F series into a fighter capable of supersonic speeds in level flight. An F9F-9 contract for six Grumman Design 98 prototype aircraft was issued on April 27, 1953. To obtain the massive drag reduction necessary, however, the design had necessarily evolved into a completely new aircraft, with the new-but-untested Curtiss Wright J-65 engine with afterburner adaptation of the nonafterburning English Armstrong Siddley Saphire engine. Curtiss Wright had never designed, developed or produced a jet engine with an afterburner. It was to be a disaster, and the downfall of a great Grumman Tiger "cat". The real reason for the F9F-9

Above right, Corky Meyer was the first pilot to fly the XF9F-2 Panther, and on 31 December 1959 he was given the honor of flying the last of 3,373 F9F Panther/Cougar aircraft built. The aircraft was F9F-8T BuNo 147429. Vincent Fassenella is in the middle and George Duncan is at right. (Corwin Meyer) At right, a trio of Grumman cats. The F11 F-1 Tiger flown by Ralph Donnell and the F9F-8T Cougar flown by Vlncent Fassenella fly wing on the Grumman-owned F8F-2 Bearcat flown by Roger Kahn, Director of the Gru mman Service Organization. He used this all-red Bearcat to make his regular visits to Navy and Marine sqUadrons throughout the United States. (via Corwin Meyer)

21

Either the conscience of someone in BuAer, or a Pentagon oversight committee, decided that after the totally-new F9F-9 had demonstrated level flight supersonic speed capability and should now be mass produced , the designation should be changed to a new aircraft contract: F11 F-1. The Panther/Cougar development program, like all military generals, then quietly faded away.

Above, the wooden F9F-9 Tiger mockup displayed with an F9F-6 Cougar. (Grumman) Below, the first F9F-9 BuNo 138604 prior to its first flight. (Grumman) Bottom, F9F-9 138604 with speed brakes deployed during its first flight on 30 July 1954. Ralph McDonnell was flying chase in the F9F-8 for Corky Meyer. (Grumman)

designation for a completely new design was that BuAer Brass at that time did not have to go outside of their realm to get permission for further development money, when it was weil within the very high-dollar volume of the F9F-8 Cougar high-rate production contract.

22

COUGAR'S FABULOUS 23-YEAR OPERATIONAL CAREER 1951 TO 1974: The first F6F-6 Cougars entered VF-32 squadron operations in November 1951 . The last F9F-8T Cougars departed VT-4 squadron operations in May 1974. Between that 23-year time period , 1988 Cougars were delivered by Grumman to the Navy. 3 XF9F-6 (BuNo 126670/72) First Flight September 20, 1951 . 646 F9F-6 Production Fighters (BuNos 126257/126264, 127216/ 127470, 128055/128294, 130920/ 131062). 168 F9F-7 Production Fighters (BuNos 130752/130919) 60 F9F-6P Photo Recon Aircraft (BuNos 127473/ 127492, 128295/ 128310, 131252/ 131255, 134446/ 134465). 601 F9F-8 Production Fighters (BuNos 131063/131251, 134234/ 134244, 138823/138898, 141030/ 141229, 141648/ 141666, 144271 / 144376). 112 F9F-8P Photo Recon Aircraft (BuNos 127216, 131063, 141668/ 141727,144377/144426). 400 F9F-8T Two-seat Trainers (BuNos 141667, 142437/142532, 142954/ 143012, 146342/146425,

14270/429 ) . COUGAR COMPETITION: North American FJ-2 Fury: In the Navy's rush to put an operational carrier swept-wing fighter in the skies ove r Korea to combat the North Korean swept-wing MiG-15s, they asked the North American Aviation Corp to re-configure a USAF F-86E Sabre for carrier operation. This aircraft, redesignated FJ-2, first flew in December 1951. Although designed fo r carrier operation, it had much too short range and endurance for carrier Combat Air Patrol mission requirements. The internal fuel was only 2,200 pounds, less than half of the Coug ar's internal fuel. The FJ-2 requi red external fuel tanks to equal th e Cougar's internal fuel capacity, but they would have to be jettisoned to regain combat performance. When carryi ng external fuel tanks, the swept-wing FJ-2 was not much faster than the straight-wing Grumman F9F5 Panther. Because of its internal fuel limitation and its structural deficieneies, making it less suitable for carrier operations than the Cougar, the FJ2s we re relegated to six land-based Marine fighter squadrons. FJ-3 Fury: Although this model Fury had 600 more pounds of internal fuel , its total fuel with two 200-gallon external tanks was only slightly greater than th at of the Cougar without external tan ks. This meant that the FJ-3 was also required to carry external tanks for all missions. Its limit dive s~ee d was only Mach 1.0, with or Wlth out external tanks, and its maneuvering limit load G was only 6.0. Th e Cougar had a limit dive Mach of 1.2 and its limit G was 7.5, giving it a greater combat advantage over the ~J-3 . The FJ-3 joined VF-174 in late 954, three years after the Cougar ;~~ered squadron operations with VF-

/ . I

~t

top, the XFJ-2s were navalized F-86Es. (MFR) Above, the FJ-2, although similar appearance, was a very different aircraft from its USAF contemporaries. (MFR) Below, refined lines of early NATC FJ-3. (via Lionel Paul) Bottom, FJ-3s first joined the fleet three years after the Cougar. (Ginter collection) In

FJ-4 F u ry: This Fury model was a co an ~PletelY re.desi~ned aircraft. It had win ncrea~e In wlng area, a thinner Win 9 Sectlon, an increased internal g pou fu el to 3950 pounds (still 1564 fOurnds. less than the Cougar) , and Wind Wlng pylons to carry SideVers ers, bombs or external fuel tanks Was u~ the Cougar's six stations. It Irst deployed to the fleet in 23

Above, FJ-4B heavy lifter with six rocket pods. (MFR) Below, VX-4 FJ-4B attacker with Bullpups. (USN) Below middle, F3H-1 N disaster. (MFR) Bottom, successful VF-13 F3H-2M all-weather missile fighters in 1963. (USN)

1959-seven years after the Cougar. The FJ-4B was equipped with the LABS system for delivering the Mark 7 nuclear bomb. It also had six wing pylons to carry 4000 pounds of stores, such as five Bullpup air-to-surface missiles which were firs t deployed to the fleet in 1959. McDonnell F3H Demon: Althoug h the F3H-1 N first flew in 1951, it had a very disastrous flight test program and was cancelled by the Navy after killing 11 test pilots and junking over 100 finished aircraft. The re-engined and re-designed F3H-2N/2M missile fighter finally entered squadrons in March 1956, five years after the Cougar. 519 of this model Demon only lasted in operational fighte r squadrons until 1964, when they were replaced by the supersonic Vought F8U-2N Crusader and McDonnell F4H-1 Phantom. To put the crucial internal fuel situation into perspective during the Cougar's era, the Navy minimu m requirement for carrier protection Combat Air Patrol was two hours on station at a 150 nautical mile radius from the carrier. This required a twoand-a-half hour take-off, cruise and landing endurance plus reserves fo r the mission . This mission time was important because it allowed the deck crews to launch and retrieve at least two other squadrons. The Cougar could perlorm a three-hour CAP mission on internal fuel. The FJ-2 and -3 with external tanks had less than an hour-and-a-half mission time , and the FJ-4 just met the mission requirement. The continuous handling, fueling and hangar ceiling storage of so many more external tanks for the Fury was also very time-consuming to the deck crews. CONCLUSION: After much lethargy, followed by frantic on-the-job-training for its transonic education, Grumman expeditiously produced 1988 of the first , and for many years the only, carrier-suitable swept-wing service fighters needed during the long cold wa r years. It was replaced by the supersonic Tiger, Crusader and Phantom II carrier-based fighters.

24

[

=

COUGAR

SPECIFICATIONS I DIMENSIONS ,../

492 . 749 I

----

I I

/

/

I

/

I

I

532 . 749

I

I

I

/

I

/

I

/

'9'-6,-7

I

/

I

-,,- /

,.

'.

; ' ':-:-'

.

I

I

'--_--146.125-

--1

.h

147 . 375

"

I I : I

I I

I I I I

I I

:' : :I~

,"**===::f I====;;;?

TECH NICAL DATA WING SPAN LENGTH HEIGHT WEIGHT, EMPTY WEIGHT , LOADED MAX SPEED CRUISE SPEED SERVIC E CEILING RANGE COMBAT RADIUS INITIAL RATE OF CLlMB CAN NON BOMBS SIDEWIN DERS POWER PLANT

F9F-6

F9F-8

34' 6" 40' 10" 12' 4" 11 ,4831bs 21 ,0001bs 561 kts 442kts 41,qOOft 810 miles 260 nm 5,600fpm 4-20mm 6 4 J48-P-8

34'6" 42'2" 12'3" 11,8661bs 24,7631bs 562kts 448kts 42,500ft 915 miles 385 nm 3,640fpm 4-20mm 6

90°

\

\

4 J48-P-8A

414

1 170

1 25

1°20' Thrust Li ne

...

...

CD

,.. 8:,

.

::-

... CD

, , "'''' .............. ..,

...,

0>_

a;,

.:::. ...

'---:... ,

... -

~'"

'"

FUSELAGE STATIONS 57-1/2

4j

...... ..."-, , "...

I

96-15/16

I

+

co ,

...

.......

20- 191 18 170-3/ 162

N'"

co ~

CD

:::-'"

,a> Na>

~-

:;

......... ...'"

-!

- -..... § ...... - ... ... ... ... ......'" ......... -... .:::...... .:::........:::.... ... '" ...... '", - '" -... -...'" '"'"'" ... CII

C;;;

0'"

,


00

'"t. .:::. N

N

'('

0
.:::. ...

-,

,

"

N

N

0

-CD _ CD

-, ... "''''

'"'"0

...... :: N N

- S- ! ... ...

...... ...


-

... ......... ;S ......

""CD, .:::. ...

L-Fuselage Refe rence Line

UI

... ca""ctt o

N

'" '" '" N

20 7 198

19

~~--~-------187

rI-i~".---I---l 7 5

-1-----176-1/2

rf-I""'I-,.---I---162

U~~=:.t52--164

153 149 141-1/ 138 128-1/2 121 112-1/ 2 104 92

152

151 141

131 :'------=---11 g -7/16 95 . 822 89- 9/ 18 80- 3/ 16 72- 11/1& 68- 15/15 57 - 7/ 8 50- 3/ 8 44 - 11/1&

'-----1lC\-3/4 :---~-108-1/2 -----=-~\10C\

N

~~--gC\

N


N

"'''' "'''' , .

'" '"',-, ...'" u

'"co

,

N

CI)

N

;:; ',-

'"' N

n"..,.:::::::.-- 42 -7/ 8

"""~:=::==: 3 5 -11/32

1I

34 - 3/ 4 34 - 5/ 32 24- 17/32 23 -21/32 111- 5/ 8 9. 588 8. 250 5. M2

o

__- - 0

-....-.;;::..........--3.25 i3.033 .20.8g1 25 . 538 3C\. 281 46. 788 51 : lC\3 59 . 234 ~:"'--61. 788 75.538 8g.288 103.038

=-~-::--::-=--II . 172

~~~~:====:::;~~:-20-7/32 0. 279 - L:::::::::::::::::::::'-~4iOO-:.liii~i65 3 _5/15

82.071 1ge . _ - -83. ~:=::::::::~::.:IS4::::..:'3:;2~1 74- 21/32 ~ ~ 79-5/32 /8 5 --- ""':'89_7/32 85 -

110.865~

F9F-6P NOSE SECTION

116. 267

~

~--=· 1 00 . 13'

101. 562 111 _1/ 18 ..-"{""_ _ _ _ 113 . 235 '""--,--...:::s-- 125 . 703

26

I\)

"'"

1. AN/APG-30 Armament Control System Radar Antenna (See Note 1) 2. 20 MM Guns (4) 3. AN/ARN-6 Radio Compass Loop Antenna 4 . Inboard Guns Ammunition Boxes (2) 5. Battery 6. Right Cabin Electrical Distribution Box 7. IFF Detonator Impact SWitch Box 8. Brake System Hydraulic Reservoir 9. Electrical System Circuit Breaker Panel 10. Gun Camera 11. ID-295/APG-SO Armament Control Tracking Indicator 12. Armament Control Gun Slght 13. Electronlc System Clrcult Breaker Panel 14. Ejection Beat Face Cover Handles and Head Rest 15. Air Conditioning' Turbine 011 Fillerneck and Drain 16. Oxygen Bottles 17. AN/ARN-6 Radio Compass Sense Antenna 18. Canopy Unlatch (for ground operation) 19. Forward Fuel Tank Fillerneck 20. Fuselage Light 21. Alt Tank FUlerneck 22. Hydraullc System Accumulator 23. Upper Hydraullc Reservoir and Flllemeck 24. Generator Electrical Connector Box 25. Engine Electrical Connector Box 26. Engine 011 Fillerneck 27. Engine Driven Accessories 28 . J48-P-6A, -8 Engine 29. AN/ARC-l VHF or AN/ARC-27 UHF Command Set Antenna 30. TaU Position Lights 31. Arrest1ng Hook Recoil strut 32. TaU Skld 33 . Formation Light L/R

3<&. Mng Tank Dump Valve L/R

36. Running Light L/R ~

37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 43. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50.

D-C External Power Receptacle Mng Tank Fuel Cells Lower Hydraulic Reservoir Fuel Tank Water Drain Valve Pressure Fuelilli Valve Wing Tanks Mng Tank Fillerneck L/R ANI APN -1 Radio Altimeter Antenna Approach Light Fuel System Drain Valve Pressure Fueling Valve Fuselage Tanks AN/ APX-6 IFF Antenna Landing Gear Emergency Air Bottle Outboard Guns AlIimunitton Box Boarding Ladder Electric Auxlliary Hydraulic Pump

51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58.

Step and Ladder Release Canopy Emergency Air Bottle A-C External Power Receptacle AN/ARR-2A Navigational Receiver Antenna Brake and Seat Ejection E'm ergency Air Bottle Left Cabin Electrical Connector Box Barricade Deflector AN/APG-30 Armament Control System Radar Antenna (See Note 2) 59. Movable Stabilizer Actuator 60. Flaperette Hydraulic Reservoir & Accumulator 61. Dropoable Tank (or External Stores) L/R

®

I

GRUMMAN

F9F-sn

F9F-6n

FUSELAGE CROSS SECTIONS

,..----RH lH & RH Sil VER PAINT

DETAIL 3

, SECTION D-D

SECTION F-F

SECTION E-E

SECTION G-G

SERIAl NUM8ER

DETAIL 5

lH lH

DETAIL 2

FENCE

lH

E I

B I

lH & RH

LH

LH RH

L - - - L H &.RH

RH

D

ARRESTING HOOK (SEE COLORING NO'

RH

C

DETAIL 1

INSIDE RED 3" WHITE STRIPE OUTSIDE

lH & RH

1n2 SCALE SIDE VIEW

-ÜJ-

I

-tb-

SEcnON A-A

SECTION

l-I

1/ 4" lEn7RING

112" lEnERING

lH & RH

DETAIL 7

\

STATle VENT

00 NOT PlUG OR OEFORM HOLE AREA WITHIN CIRClE MUST BE SMOOTH & CLEAN

SECTION C-C

('\

I' I I

DETAIL 1A

8

C

D

FUSElAGE

2-1/2"

7-112"

i'-I"

.'-6"

WlNG

3"

9"

1'-8-112"

6'-5"

NOTE: - - - - - - - - - , SCALE OF DETAILS TWICE SIZE OF MAIN VIEWS EXCEPT AS DIMENSIONE.o

BOMB PYLONS

APPROACH LIGHT LH & RH

DETAIL 4 2" LETTERING """':::::::. F9F-6 NAVY 4" LETTERING 127129 _

28

SERIAL NUMBER

:OLORING NOTES-----------.

DETAIL 2

ENTIRE AIRPLANE . . . . . G LOSSY SEA BLUE ALL LETTERING AND MARKINGS UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED . . . . WHITE ARRESTING HOOK . . BLACK AND WHITE STRIPES NATIONAL INSIGNIA . . . . RED AND WHITE (lNSIGNIA BLUE OMITTED ON BLUE NAVY PLANES)

BLOW-IN DOOR OIL-USE AN-0-9 GRADE 1010 HYDRAULIC TA'N K EXTERNAL HYDRAULIC POWER USE MIL-0-5606 FLUID ONLY (RED COLOR)

DETAIL 5

"'-

:T

Itl

M ,I

~___N_O __S_TE_P__________~

T N

T 1

f-------

WARNING

1'-9" - - - - - - l , 1

FOR TAIL REMOVAL SEE E & M

. ~_________N_O __S_T_E_P__~_

r ' - - - - - - 1 '-9"

RH BLOW-IN DOOR

AIRPLANE CO NTAINS A eu.o:r EJECTION SEAT INCORPORATING PERSONNEL CATAPULT AND DROGUE GUN CARTRIDGE.FOR SEAT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REFER TC PILOT'S HANDBOOK AND ERECTION MAINTENANCE MANUAL

16° .

DET Alr '6 - - ,-

DETAIL 3

DANGER-AMMUNITION OR BALLAST MUST BE INSTALLED BEFORE TAKE-OFF GUNS HAVE NOT BEEN TEST FIRED BY CONTRACTOR .

APPROACH LIGHT CENTERING MARKS

1

-------1

LH BLOW-IN DOOR

" ' - - 1/ 4" LETTERING

~1========~8r.,,========~ RED BACK GROUND LH & RH

WHITE

SECTION K-K

F9F-sn c::

1n2 SCALE

==SECTION J-J

- N

SECTION H,H

WING SECTION~S-r_ _ _-L-----"--------:7L.-.-j."c:::.~-=::::::-.,-

TOP VIEW

-'-"'-*l-N \.11 "rlIt-l.-l,-....l,..... WHITE LETTERING ON

80TTOM OF LEFT WING ONL Y - -""'C;;:;::===~_SECTION L-L

NATIONAL INSIGNIA (ALSO ON SOTTOM OF RIGHT WING IN SAME LOCATION) - - - - -

SECTION M-M

SECIIO~ ~-N

STABILlZER SECTIONS

29

F9F-6 COUGAR

30

BuNo

126670

F9F-6

COUGAR

31

BuNo 126670

1. Gom RaDciDa Radar A _ (iJuItalIed Oll AirplaDes witboat Ja-Webt RefuelUac Probe) 2. Radlo Compua Loop AIlteIua S. 20mm Gau

4. Battal'J 5. AmmuDltiOll 808s I. Gom RaDciDa Radar ADte_ (lDatalled Oll AirpllUles with ID-Ili&bt RefueUDs Probe) ,. Brab IIJlltem IIJdnwliC Reaenotr

8. Clrcu1t Breabr PaMl 9. GIIIlIIIPt Ud 10. FIuIe Paael 11. Air CoCIdltiOllblC TurbJDe OU PUler Port 12. Radlo Compaaa 8e_ Ante_ IS. Forward 1Ue1 TUlt PiUe1'D8Cll: 14. Aft IUeI Tuk FlUe1'D8Cll: 15. Upper Bydnwlic ReMrvoIr UKI FlUerneclr;

11. Bacme OU F1Ueraeck 1'. FJaperette Bydraulic Reaenoir ud FWe1'D8Cll: 18. BDglDe 19. LeadID& Bdce Fllel Tuk (Part 01 Wlnc TaDk) L/R 20. D-C B:iltemal Power Receptacles 21. WlDg TUlt Pre8lAll'e Flleling Val" L/R 22. Wille TaDIt FlUeraeck L/R 2S. Lower Bydnwlic ReMnolr (F1Ued from Upper Reservoir

24. 25. 28.

n.

28.

29.

SO. 31.

FlUeraeck) l>r<1IJpable Taak or BlItemal stores 1FF AnteIma PreBAre lUellDg Vabe OXygen BoWes A-C BlItemal Power Rec:eptacle UBI' CommaDd Set BIade Anlenna UBF BomlDc Adapter AntenDa UBF NaYlptlon An1enna

Co)

N

®

L/R

GRUMMAN

F9F-8

F9F-8

F9F-8/88

F9F-6n

F9F-8/88

1n2 SCALE 33

F9F-8/88

FUSELAGE CROSS SECTION

RH LH & RH SILVERPAINT

DETAIL 3

SECTION D-D

SECTION G-G

SECTION F-F

SECTION E-E

SERIAL NUMBER

DETAIL 5

DETAIL 2 E

I

-

<:>

I

F

E

LH & RH LH

RH

LH LH

RH

& RH

INSIDE RED

1n2 SCALE LH & RH DETAIL 7

DO NOT PLUG OR DEFORM HOLE AREA WITHIN CIRCLE MUST BE SMOOTH & CLEAN

DETAIL 1 NATIONAL INSIGNIA RED

I~i WHITE

0

BLUE

~/2" LETTERING . 1/4" LE7ER'NG .......... 5T ATIC VENT

BI

,",

30°f./\

li

3"R

-*1'"

1\ 11

RED

30'"

NOTE. _ _ _ _ _..... SCALE OF DETAILS TWICE SIZE OF MAIN VIEWS EXCEPT AS DIMENSIONED

APPROACH LIGHT

COLORING NOTES _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.., LIGHT GULL GRAY: FUSELAGE, WING AND FLAPERONS VIEWED FROM ABOVE-VERTICAL STABIllZER AND RUDDER BOTH SIDES. WHITE: FUSELAGE AND WING VIEWED FROM BELOW-FLAPS, TRIMMERS, HORIZONTAL STABIUZER AND ELEVATORS VIEWED FROM ABOVE AND BELOW. NOTE: GRAY AND WHITE MEET ALONG A BLENDED IMAGINARY UNE APPROX. AT MAXIMUM WIDTH OF FUSELAGE. BLACK: ALL LETTERING EXCEPT AS NOTED-ANTI GLARE AREA.

LH & RH

DETAIL 4 2" LETTE RING - - _ . F9F-8

4" LETTERING---' 141115

FRONT VIEW

34

DETAIL 2 BLOW·IN DOOR Oll-USE AN·O·9 GRADE 1010 HYDRAULIC TANK EXTERNAl HYDRAUlIC POWER

T 1 M ,I

FOR TAIL REMOVAL SEE E & M

~

USE MIL·O·5606 FLUID ONl Y (RED COLOR)

DETAIL 5

NO STEP

~----~~~-~-~1~'-~9~"~~~----------~~1

WARNING

T 1

AIRPLANE CONTAINS A PILOT -EJEalON SEAT !NCORPORA. TlNG PERSONNEL CATAPULT CARTRIDGE.FOR SEAT OPERA· TION AND MAINTENANCE RE· FER TO PILOTS HANDBOOK AND ERECTION AND MAINTE· NANCE MANUAL.

4"

.RH.~BLQ.W-=lli..QQQ~_ .

. ..

NO STEP

tl========~~I~'-~9~"~-~----~---~ .J.tLBJ.QWdN.J2Q.QR.

16 °

DETAIL 3

DETAIL 6 DANGER-AMMUNITION OR BALLAST MUST BE INSTALLED BEFORE TAKE OFF. GUNS HAVE NOT BEEN TEST FIRED BY CONTRACTOR " -

APPROACH LIGHT CENTERING MARKS

=~==-----­ \00.---- 7·1/4"-----l

L..!\

~1/4"

RED BACKGROUND LH & RH

lETIERING

WHITE

F9F-8/88

DETAIL 9 VIEWED FROM BElOW

SECTION K· K

1n2 SCALE

DIVE BRAKE: 6" BlACK STRIPE AlONG BOTTOM INBOARD AND TRAllING EDGES

SllVER PAINT

SECTION J.J

OP

3" DIA BlACK

V II;W·/w--

I

-@-

M

SECTION A·A APPROACH LIGHT BOHOM lH & FUEl

---c

lH &

__

SECTION l -l

TOP lH & SECTION B·B

3" DIA BlACK FUEl NATIONAL INSIGNIA (ALSO ON BOTTOM OF RIGHT WING IN SAME lOCATION)

--c ~-SECTION M-M

--~-­

SECTION N-N

SFeTl ON

ce

POSITION LI GHT

35

ST ABILIZER SECTIONS

20MM

GUN

NOSE

INSTALLATION

Expandable locking channel controlled by lever "A". On lock position, the locking chalUlel Is expanded outward to engage nose and fuselage mid section.

TO INSTALL

TO REMOVE

1. Remove all dirt or foreign objects and lubricate the tracks. 2. Instali the nose upon tracks. 3. Put lever "B" up, into stop position. 4. SUde the nose firmly into place against the fuselage. 5. Pulliever "A" down to lock. 6. Examine warning light in cabin. It should be out if nose is locked securely.

1. Depress button and push lever "A" up to unlock position. 2. Push nose forward approximately 40 inches. 3. Pulliever "B" down to unlock track stop. 4. Slide nose completely off track.

36

]

[

F9F-6n 20MM

\. DETAIL

GUNS, AMMUNITION

BOXES AND CHUTES

~)

\. DETAIL 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. .12. 13. 14.

Nose Section Gun Muzzle Fairing (4) M3 20mm Gun (4) Ammunition Feed Mechanism (4) Trigger Solenoid Assembly (4) MK5 Mod 1 Gun Charger (4) Gun Charger Spring Latch (4) Link Ejection Chute (4) Gun Charger Bracket (4) Feeder Mechanism Actuating Bracket (4) Inboard Gun Ammunition Box (2) Outboard Gun Ammunition Feed Chute (2) Outboard Gun Ammunition Box (2) Inboard Gun Ammunition Feed Chute (2) Gun Forward Mounting Fitting (4)

15. 16. 17. ·· 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24 . 25. 26. 27 .

37

Gun Forward Mount Attaching Bolt (16) Attaching Bolt Retainer (4) Gun Forward Mount Bracket (4) Gun Forward Mount Bolt (4) Nose Section Gun Mount Channel Gun Aft Mounting Bushing (4) Gun Rear Mounting Post (4) Gun Aft Mounting Pin (4) Gun Rear Mount Fitting (4) Gun Aft Mount Attaching Bolt (16) Gun Aft Mounting Block (4) GT -467 - 20mm Gun Adjusting Socket Wrench GT-437 - Ammunition Belt Lead-in Cable

)]l)

F9F-6n 20MM

GUNS, AMMUNITION

Aft Cockpit Armor Plate Control Stick Trigger Grip Ranging Control (On Throttle Grip) Bullet-Resistant Glass Windsnieid 5. CG-4 (GGS Recorder) 6. Mk 8 Mod. 0 Sight Unit 7. Armament Switch Panel (Gun Master, Gun Charging) 1. 2. 3. 4.

F9F-8/8B

20MM

BOXES AND

8. A.F.C.S. Electrical Control Box (On L.H. Console) 9. Forward Cockpit Armor Plate 10. Gun No. 2 Ammunition Box 11. Gun-No. 3 Ammunition Box 12. Gun No. 1 20 mm M3 13. Gun No. 2 20 mm M3 14. Gun No. 3 20 mm M3 15. Gun Blast Shields

GUNS,

NOSE SECTION

38

CHUTES

16. Gun No. 4 20 mm M3 17. Gun No. 4 Ammunition Box 18. Gun No. 1 Ammunition Box

CUTAWAY

]

Above, three Marines loading am mo in an early F8F-8 (BuNo 138833) in April 1957. (National Archives) Below, ammo-Ioading of F8F-8 BuNo 141077 aboard the USS Essex (CVA-9) in October 1956. (National Archives)

39

]

F9F-6n EXTERNAL STORES SIDEWINDER

PACKAGE AERO X9A

STA. 71

GROUND LlNE (T AlL DOWN BUMPER RETRACTED; MAIN WHEELS FULLY COMPRESSED)

---lJROUND LlNE (TAIL DOWN BUMPER RETRACTED; MAIN WHEELS FULLY COMPRESSED)

ROCKET PACKAGE', AERO X'7A

PACKAGE , AERO Xl0A

GROUND 'LINE(TAIL DOWN BUMPER RETRACTED; MAIN WHEELS FULLY COMPRESSED)

'---GROUND LINE (TAIL'DOWN BUMPER RETRACTED; MAINWHEELS FULLY COMPRESSED) ,

ROCKET PACKAGE AERO 6A

MK12 DROPPABLE FUEL TANK

~--~--

40

F9F-sn

EXTERNAL STORES

1000 POUND BOMB G.P. HIGH ' S~nD 'FINS

GROUND LINE (T AlL DOWN BUMPER RETRACTED; MAIN WHEE"LS FULLY COMPRE SSED)

500 POUND BOMB G.P. LOW DRAG

'-----GROUND LINE (TAIL DOWN BUMPER RETRACTED; MAIN WHEELS FULLY COMPRESSED)

Above, F9F-6 BuNo 127219 with two yellow 1,000 pound general purpose bombs with high-speed fins. (Grumman)

1000 POUND B OMB G.P. LOW DRAG

500 POUND BOMB G.P. HIGH -SPEED FINS

:::::~~~:::::::=-GROUND LINE .(TAIL DOWN BUMPER RETRACT E D; MAIN WHEELS FULLY COMPRESSOED)

~GROUND LI1NE (TAIL DOWN BUMPER RETRACTE 1D; MAIN WHEELS FULLY COMPRESS!::D)

41

COUGAR

EXTERNAL WING

TANKS

Prototype F9F-8 BuNo 127216 over Long Island Sound on 15 November 1954. In an effort to possibly increase the Cougar's ran ge beyond that with the Navy-furnished Aero-1C 150-gallon external drop tanks, Grumman engineeri ng designed these fancy coke-bottle sha"ped 150-gallon external tan ks which proved to have more drag than the Navy tanks! One performance flight was sufficient to junk them. (Grumman)

--

42

Above, F9F-8 demonstration test aircraft BuNo 131063 with six Aero-7D rocket pods containing 19-2.75" rockets each for a total of 144 rockets. (Grumman) At right, Aero 65A pylon looking forward on a folded wing. (Grumman) Below, F9F-6 BuNo 127218 with two yellow 1,000-pound low-drag bombs. (Grumman) Bottom, 300-gallon external fuel tank installed on the first experimental F9F-6. These tanks had so much drag that they did not extend the range sufficiently over the slimmer 150-gallon tanks. These were never used on the Cougar operationally. (Grumman)

43

F9F-8/8B

EXTERNAL STORES

]

F9F-8B BuNo 141140 contigured tor the long-range carrier Combat Air Patrol (CAP) mission with two Aero 1C 150-gallon drop tanks and tour AIM-9B Sidewinder air-to-air missiles. The inert Sidewinders were painted red. The bulge under the nose is the UHF homing antenna tairing. All production F9F-8s had this very pilot-triendly device installed and all prior Cougars were retrotitted with this UHF homing antenna during overhaul. (Grumman)

44

AIM-9AlB SIDEWINDER

HEAT-SEEKING AIR-TC-AIR

Dr. William B. McLean and the scientists at the Naval Ordnance Test Station (NOTS) at China Lake, CA, developed the Sidewinder missile from McLean's concept for a "fire-and-forget" missile for short-range combat. The essence of the concept was to build a guided missile that would detect the heat radiated from an enemy aircraft and track it and destroy it no matter how it maneuvered to avoid interce pt. From this concept, the AIM-9 (Air Intercept Missile Nine) was born . The heat-seeker used a cooled lead sulfide detector and a new guidance system to self-guide it to the target. Maneuvering was accomplished by four control vanes located about one-foot aft of the infrared optics. The fuse followed the control vanes and the warhead followed the fuse. This was followed by the solid propellant rocket motor and the fixed stabilizers. The name Sidewinder came from the rocket's winding motion while in pursuit of its target, which resembled the movement of the indigenous Mojave Desert rattlesnake, the Sidewinder. The early Sidewinders were capable of speeds of Mach 2.5, with a range of up to two miles and at altitudes fram sea level to over 50,000 feet. The first firing occurred on 11 September 1953, from the wing of a Douglas F3D SkyKnight by future astronaut LT Walter M. Schirra. The target, a radio-controlled Grumman F6F Hellcat, was deemed as destroyed if the missile had had a warhead. Praduction was given to the Philco Corporation , and the first operational carrier deployments took place in 1956 with VA-46 aboard the USS Randolph in the Atlantic, and with VF-211 aboard the USS Bon Homme Richard in the Pacific. Above, COR Ashworth and AIM-9 next to an F9F-8 BuNo 141655. The Cougar would serve as the primary test aircraft tor the early Sidewinder program. (USN) Below, Sidewinder being loaded on a China Lake F9F-8. (USN via Gary Verver)

45

MISSILE

--

--

Above, a NAS China Lake QF-9J BuNo 144269 testing a Shrike anti-radiation missile in the 1960s. (USN) At lett, an F9F-8 with an Aero 65A pylon inboard which typically carried fuel tanks. An AIM-9 Sidewinder missile adapter and launch rail are at center and an Aero 15A bomb adapter is at right. (Grumman) Below, another publicity view of F9F-8 Bu No 141140 with two Aero 1C 150-gallon wing tanks and four Sidewinder missiles. (Grumman)

46

STANDARD IN BOARD WEAPONS PYLON

AERO 22A-1 EJECTOR RACK

AERO 15A BOMB RACK

AIM-9 SIDEWINDER PYLON AND LAUNCHER RAIL

Above, VX-5 F9F-8 BuNo 131075 in a dive with forward fuselage speed brakes extended while carrying a twelve kilo ton nuke in 1955. Fuselage, nose and tail stripes were green outlined in white. (S. Joel Premselaar via Gary Verver) At lett, loading AIM-9 Sidewinder on F9F-8 BuNo 141655 at NAF China Lake on 26 December 1956. (USN via Gary Verver) Below, F9F-8 BuNo 131159 with AIM-9A in flight over the Inyokern area. (USN via Gary Verver)

47

>

Above, splitter plate-equipped F9F-8 BuNo 131884 tensioned tor a carrier launch with two 150-gallon drop tanks and tour 500 pound low-drag bombs. (National Archives) Below, F9F-8B titted with a Aero 22A nuclear weapons pylon (see page 19). (Grumman) Below right, China Lake F9F-8 titted with a Aero X7A or X9A rocket pod. (National Archives) Bottom, F9F-8141140 with tour 500 pound and two 1,000 pound low-drag bombs. (Grumman)

48

COCKPIT' ACCESS

~~------------~

00 not use anti-buffet spoilers (painted yellow) oil windshield bow as hand grips when entering 01' leav~g cockpit.

CLOSE CANOPY

CANOPY GROUND OPERATION CONTROL Advance right foot to bighest step and swing left leg into cockpit, then swing right leg into cockpit. Ladder must be pushed into stowed PQsition by ground crew.

Advance left foot to lowest step. With right hand, depress forward end of "CANOPY GROUND OPERATION CONTROL" with thumb, and rotate handle up to open canopy.

'1ttJte-----

lß--------...

Canopy 18 engaged with hydraulic cylinder only when handgrip 18 in "UP" position.

Release ladder by depressing lowest step plate with left hand. Place right foot on ladder , left hand in hand access hole, and right hand in mid step.

49

COCKPIT ACCESS AND

EJECTION

SEAT

Above, right-hand view of an F9F-8 ejection seat. (Grumman) Above lett, pilot posing on entry steps of an F9F Cougar. (National Archives) At lett, extended lower step on an F9F-8P and intake splitter plate. Note. (Ginter)

50

[ __----------------=EJ~E~C~T~IO~N~S~E~A~T------------------~

• __.....

:

_.~w

__

-

._~

=

____ -

~~_~

1. Electric Seat Height Control 2. Ejection Seat Knee Brace (2) 3. utility Electrical Receptacle 4. Ejection Seat Face Cover Handle 5. Headrest 6. Emergency Ejection Seat Arming Control Handle 7. Canopy Defrosting Tube 8. Cabin Pressure Dump Valve Control Lever 9 . . Cabin Pressure Regulator 10. Shoulder Harness Inertia Reel Lock Control Lever

:

-____ _

-

11. Ejection Seat Foot Rest (2) 12. Auto Pilot Emergency Off Switch (Not used) . 13. Gun Trigger Switch (F9F -8 Airplanes) Camera Trigger Switch (F9F-8P Airplanes) 14. Bomb Release Switch (F9F-8 Airplanes) Extra Picture Switch (F9F-8P Airplanes) 15. Horizontal Stabilizer Trim and Wing Trim Control Button 16. Rocket Switch

51

Above and below, F9F-6 cockpit. (National Archives) Above right, VF-142 F9F6 BuNo 127434 after emergency landing due to lack of fuel at NAAS EI Centro on 18 November 1953. (NMNA)

52

1.) Emergency Gear Handle 2.) Gear and Flaps Position Indicator 3.) Canopy Control Handle 4.) Emergency Canopy Control Handle 5.) Radio Altimeter Low Level Warning Light 6.) Oil Pressure Indicator 7.) Low Fuel Boost Pressure Warning Light 8.) Speed Brake Position Indicator 9.) Radio Altimeter 10.) Armament Switch Panel 11.) Sight Unit 12.) Tracking Indicator ID-295/APG-30 13.) Stand-by Compass 14.) Elapsed Time Clock 15.) Accelerometer 16.) Fire Warning Lights 17.) Fuel Quantity Indicator Push-to-Test Switch 18.) Fire Warning Light Circuit Test Switch 19.) Low Fuel Level Warning Light 20.) Clock 21.) Fuel Flowmeter 22.) Hook Position Warning Light 23.) Tail Skid Control switch 24.) Cabin Altimeter 25.) Sliding Nose Unlocked Warning Light 26.) Arresting Hook Control Handle 27.) Hook Up Push Button Switch 28.) Fuel Quantity Indicator 29.) Cabin Air Foot Outlet Control

30.) Radio Compass Indicator 31.) Fast Erecting Gyro Horizon 32.) Rate-of-Climb Indicator 33.) G-2 Remote Compass 34.) Turn and Bank Indicator

35.) 36.) 37.) 38.) 39.)

Wing and Stabilizer Trim Thumb Switch Relief Tube Radar Switch Bomb Release Switch Altimeter

53

40.) 41.) 42.) 43.) 44.)

Maximum Allowable Airspeed Indicator Tailpipe Temperature Gage Landing Gear Control Airstart Emergency Igniter Cont. Hand. Landing Gear Control 45.) Tachometer

F9F-6n RIGHT - HAND CONSOLE

1.) 2.) 3.) 4.) 5.)

Cireuit Breaker Panel AC System Control Panel Exterior Lights Control Panel Yaw Damper Start & Reset Switeh Interior Lights Control Panel

6.) Engine & Mise. Control Switehes 7.) Chartboard Stowage Case 8.) Fuse Panel 9.) AN/ARN-6 Radio Compass Controls 10.) Spare Lamps

54

11.) Hydraulie Pressure On-Off Control 12.) Antenna Relay Cireuit Breaker 13.) Antenna Relay Control Switeh 14.) Unit 11, Servo Radar Range Aero 1A 15.) Stabilizer Trim Power Cireuit Breakers 16.) Wing Folding and Loeking Control 17.) Utility Reeeptaele 18.) Auxiliary Hydraulie Pump Switeh 19.) Map Ca se 20.) Auxiliary Hyd. Pump Press. Gage 21.) Main Hyd. System Pressure Gage 22.) Flaperette System Hyd. Pump Cont. 23.) AN/APX-6 IFF Control Panel 24.) AN/ARR-2 Navigational Radio Cont. 25.) AN/ARC-27 UHF Command Set Panel 26.) Seat Height Control Lever 27.) Eleetrieal System Control Panel 28.) Stand-by Temp. Control Switeh 29.) Ram Air Ventilation Control Switeh 30.) AC System On-Off Switeh 31.) Automatie Temp. Control Rheostat 32.) Manual Ext. Lights Coding Ind. Lt. 33.) Manual Ext. Lights Coding Key 34.) Ext. Lights Control Switehes (4) 35.) Auto. Coding Letter Sei. Switeh 36.) Ext. Lights Master Control Switeh 37.) Inst. Pnl. Lights Co nt. Switeh/Rheo. 38.) Console Light Cont. Switeh/Rheostat 39.) G-2 Compass Control Switeh 40.) Fast Ereeting Gyro Horizon Warn. Lt. 41.) Pitot Heat Control Switeh 42.) Fast Ereeting Gyro Horizon Control

F9F-617 RIGHT - HAND CONSOLE

43.) Engine Cranking Switch 44.) Fuel System Master Switch 45.) Engine Starting Master Switch

46.) Battery Switch 47.) Generator Warning Light 48.) Inverter Warning Light

55

49.) Inverter Changeover Switch 50.) Voltammeter 51.) Cabin Pressurization Combat - Normal Switch

F9F-sn LEFT - HAND CONSOLE

1.) Oxygen Tube 2.) Anti-G Suit Tube Receptacle 3.) Emergency Speed Brakes UP-Handle 4.) Microphone and Headset Plug 5.) Canopy Defroster Tube 6.) Cabin Air Conditioning Thermostat 7.) Cabin Pressure Dump Control Lever 8.) Cabin Pressure Regulator 9.) Radio Altimeter Limit Switch (see Note 1) 10.) Tab for Personel Gear Connections 11.) MK 20 Mod 0 A.C.S. Control Rheostats 12.) C-775/APG-30 Gun Ranging Radar Control 13.) Canopy Defroster Control Lever 14.) Console Air Conditioning Outlet Control Handle 15.) Ejection Seat Pre-Ejection Lever 16.) Wing Flap Control Lever 17.) Oxygen Regulator and Control Panel 18.) Catapult Grip 19.) Throttle Friction Control Lever 20.) Speed Brakes Control Switch 21.) Stabilizer Position Indicator 22.) Throttle Lever and Aero 4C Radar Ranging Con.

56

F9F-6n LEFT - HAND CONSOLE 23.) 24.) 25.) 26.) 27.) 28.) 29.) 30.) 31.) 32.) 33.) 34.) 35.) 36.) 37.) 38.)

Microphone Button Switch Stabilizer Trim Emergency Control Switch Detail Stabilizer Trim Emergency Power Control Switch Brake Emergency Control Handle Speed Brakes Emergency Landing Override Switch Wing Tank Dump Switch Wing Tank Empty Warning Lights Wing Tank Selector Switches Emergency Engine Fuel System Warning Light Fuel System Boost Pump Cut-Off Button Switch Engine Fuel System Selector Switch Engine Driven Fuel Pumps Warning Light Hydraulic (Emergency Stabilizer Shift) Control Switch (see Note 2) Longitutdinal Control System Selector Switch Deleted Stabilizer Hydraulic Power Emergency Shut-Off Switch

~---~--------------------~ 1. Radio Altimeter Limit Setting Switch is instalied only on airplanes ser No. 126257 through 127297. 2. On airplanes ser No. 127258 and subsequent, the stabilizer power control panel (Detail B) replaces stabilizer power control panel shown in main view. ltem 35 is operative only when the flying tail system is installed. 3. On airplanes with the interim flying tail modification instalied, the panel shown as detail BB replaces the one shown as detail B. On these airplanes the stabilizer position indicator , item 21, is replaced by an absolute stabilizer position indicator mounted on the instrument panel.

57

BB

F9F-8 COCKPIT

1.) Landing Gear Emergency Air Control Handle 2.) Low Fuel Boost Pres. Warn. Light 3.) Speed Brakes Position Indicator 4.) Absolute Stabilizer Position Indicator 5.) Armament Master Switch 6.) LABS Angle Switch 7.) Outboard Gun Charging Switch 8.) Inboard Gun Charging Switch 9.) Accelerometer 10.) Range Scale 11.) T-O Indicator Light 12.) LABS Indicator Light 13.) Fixed Reticle Masking Lever 14.) Fire Warning Lights 15.) Fire Warning Light Circuit Test Switch 16.) Target Span Scale on MK 8 Mod 0 Sight Unit 17.) Emergency Instrument Light and Switch 18.) Tracking Indicator 19.) Stand-by Compass 20.) Space provision for Dive and Roll Indicator 21.) Clock 22.) Low Fuel Level Warning Light 23.) Fuel Qty. Gage Push-to-Test Switch

Below, F9F-8 cockpit under construction in 1957. (Grumman)

58

F9F-8 COCKPIT

24.) 25.) 26.) 27.) 28.) 29.) 30.) 31.) 32.) 33.) 34.) 35.) 36.) 37.) 38.) 39.) 40.) 41.) 42.) 43.) 44.) 45.)

Fuel Quantity Indicator Arresting Hook Pos. Warn. Light Space provisions for Range Ind. Arresting Hook and Barrier Guard Control Handle Arresting Hook Raising Push Button Switch Air Conditioning Foot Outlet Control Fuel Flowmeter Space provision for Course Ind. Course Indicator Gyro Horizon Indicator Rate-of-Climb Indicator G-2 Remote Compass Indicator Turn and Bank Indicator Airspeed and Mach Number Ind. Altimeter Tachometer Indicator Tailpipe Temperature Indicator Oil Pressure Indicator Airstart Emergency Igniter Control Landing Gear Control, Down Lock Solenoid Manual Release Knob Wheels and Flaps Position Indicator Landing Gear Normal Cont. Leverl Landing Gear Unlocked Warn. Light

1.) Landing Gear Emergency Air Control Handle 2.) Low Fuel Boost Pressure Warn. Light 3.) Speed Brakes Position Indicator 4.) Angle of Attack Indicator 5.) Armament Master Switch 6.) LABS Angle Switch 7.) Outboard Gun Charging Switch 8.) Inboard Gun Charging Switch 9.) Accelerometer 10.) Range Scale 11.) T-O Indicator Light 12.) LABS Indicator Light 13.) Variable Reflector Knob 14.) Fixed Reticle Masking Lever 15.) Fire Warning Lights 16.) Fire Warn. Light Circuit Test Switch 17.) Target Span Scale 18.) MK 8 Mod 0 Sight Unit 19.) Emergency Inst. Light and Switch 20.) Tracking Indicator 21.) Stand-by Compass 22.) Space provision for Dive and Rolllnd. 23.) Clock 24.) Absolute Stabilizer Position Ind. 25.) Low Fuel Level Warning Light

59

26.) 27.) 28.) 29.) 30.) 31.) 32.) 33.) 34.) 35.) 36.) 37.) 38.) 39.) 40.) 41.) 42.) 43.) 44.) 45.) 46.)

Fuel Qty. Gage Push-to-Test Switch Fuel Quantity Indicator Arresting Hook Position Warn. Light Space provisions for Range Ind. Arresting Hook/Barrier Guard Co nt. Arresting Hook Raising PIB Switch Air Conditioning Foot Outlet Control Fuel Flowmeter Space provision for Course Indicator Course Indicator Gyro Horizon Indicator Rate-of-Climb Indicator G-2 Remote Compass Indicator Turn and Bank Indicator Airspeed and Mach Number Ind. Altimeter Tachometer Indicator Tailpipe Temperature Indicator Oil Pressure Indicator Airstart Emergency Igniter Control Landing Gear Control Down Lock Solenoid Manual Release Knob 47.) Landing Gear Normal Co nt. Leverl Landing Gear Unlocked Warn. Lt. 48.) Wheels and Flaps Position Indicator

F9F-8 INSTRUMENT PANEL

F9F-8 RIGHT - HAND CONSOLE DETAILS During late 1956 the Air Crew Equipment Laboratory, Naval Air Material Command tested a variety of light grey color background instrument and console panels on a F9F-6 Cougar. The test proved that visibility was greatly improved and light grey panels started replacing black ones.

Detail A

60

F9F-8

1.) Circuit Breaker Panel 2.) Cabin Pressure Altimeter 3.) Spare Lamps 4.) Exterior Lights Control Panel 5.) Sliding Nose Unlocked Light 6.) Tail Skid Control Switch 7.) Yaw Damper Power On-Off Switch 8.) Interior Lights Control Panel 9.) Engine and Mis. Control Switch Panel 10.) IFF Control Panel 11.) Fuse Panel 12.) SIF Panel 13.) UHF Command Set Control Panel 14.) Flaperette Control Switch 15.) Antenna Relay Switch Circuit Breaker (BuNos 131063-131070) 16.) Antenna Relay Control Switch (BuNos 131063-131070) 17.) Map Ca se 18.) Unit 11 Servo Radar Range Aero 1 19.) Stabilizer Control Power Circuit Breaker Panel 20.) Wing Folding/Locking Control Levers 21.) Spare Lamp and Fuse Container 22.) Auxiliary Hyd. System Pres. Gage 23.) Auxiliary Hyd. Pump Control Switch

RIGHT - HAND CONSOLE

'- DlfAil

24.) Main Hydraulic System Pres. Gage 25.) Combat Hyd. Sys. On-Off Control Lever 26.) Location of T145 Panel 27.) Radio Compass Control Panel 28.) Electrical Power Control Panel 29.) Exterior Lights Manual Code Key . 30.) Code Key Indicator Light 31.) Exterior Lights Co nt. Switches (4) . 32.) Exterior Lights Master Switch 33.) Code Selector Switch 34.) Con. Light Switch and Rheostat 35.) Inst. Pnl. Light Switch & Rheostat 36.) G-2 Compass Control Switch

61

37.) 38.) 39.) 40.) 41 .) 42.) 43.) 44.) 45.) 46.) 47.)

ID)

Pitot Heat Control Switch Engine Crank Switch Fuel Master Switch Engine Start Master Switch Battery Switch Generator Warning Light Instrument Power Failure Warning Light Inverter Changeover Switch Exterior Lights Auxiliary Master Switch Voltammeter Fuel Control Heat Switch

F9F-8

F9F-8

RIGHT - HAND CONSOLE

LEFT - HAND CONSOLE

62

1.) 2.) 3.) 4.) 5.) 6.)

G-Suit Reeeptaele G-Suit Pressure Control Valve. Mierophone and Headset Plug Oxygen Tube Emer. Flaperette Air Press. Gage Mk 20 Mod 0 ACS Control Panel

7.) Canopy Defrost Control Lever 8.) Gun Ranging Radar Control Panel 9.) Console AC Outlet Control Handle 10.) Ejeetion Seat Pre-ejeetion Lever 11.) Wing Flaps Control Lever 12.) Airplane Fuel System Cont. Panel

63

13.) Engine Fuel System Control Panel 14.) Stores Emer. Release Sei. Lever 15.) Stores Emer. Release T-Handle 16.) Canopy Emergeney Control Lever 17.) Canopy Normal Control Lever 18.) Armament Control Panel 19.) Oxygen Regulator & Cont. Panel 20.) Catapult Grip 21.) Throttle Frietion Control Lever 22.) Flying Tail Shift Cireuit Breaker 23.) Air Conditioning On-Off Switeh 24.) Air Conditioning Ine./Dee. Switeh 25.) Longitudinal Cont. Sys. Sei. 26.) Stabilizer Eie. Trim SeI. Switeh 27.) Long. Cont. Emer. Manual Knob 28.) Stab. Emer. Trim Switeh 29.) Rudder Trim Switeh 30.) Rudder Trim Position Indieator 31.) Emer. Flaperette Power Control 32.) Wheel Brake Emer. Cont. Hand. 33.) Speed Brake Emer. Override 34.) Throttle Lever 35.) Mierophone Switeh 36.) Wing Tank Dump Switeh 37.) Wing Tank Seleetor Switehes UR 38.) Fuel Flow Warning Lights 39.) Engine Emer. Fuel System Ind. Lt. 40.) Fuel Boost Pump Cut-off Switeh 41.) Engine Fuel System Seleetor 42.) Engine Fuel Pump Warning Light

COUGAR WINGFOLD

Above, inner right Cougar wingfold area seen with wing removed. Good view of outer landing gear door. Below, outer right wing wingfold area of removed Cougar wing. Bottom, inner left Cougar wingfold area after restoration in 1988. (Ginter)

64

COUGAR WINGFOLD

Below, F9F-8 lett wingfold. (Grumman) Below right, closeup of landing light installation in the lett wing leading edge. (Grumman) Bottom, F9F-8 being towed iIIustrates the fully-folded position of the Cougar's wings. (Grumman)

65 bz

F9F-7 ALLISON

J33-A-16 ENGINE

The J33-A-16 engine developed 5,850 Ibs of static thrust (dry)

All Fleet F9F-7 Cougars were re-engined with the J48-P-6/8 engine.

66

F9F-7 ALLISON

J33-A-16

67

ENGINE

F9F-6/8 PRATT AND WHITNEY J48-P-8 ENGINE

The J48-P-8 engine developed 6,250 Ibs of static thrust (dry) 1.) 2.) 3.)

4.) 5.) 6.) 7.) 8.) 9.) 10.) 11.) 12.) 13.)

Drain Collector Tank Connectlon and Fuel System Drain Llne Englne Flreseal Baffle Assembly Pressure Balanclng Scupper and Englne - Driven Fuel Booster Pump Vent Llne DC External Power Receptacle Assembly Tlp Tank Fuel System Transfer Pump Installation Englne Mount Clamp Fitting Hydraullc Pump DIscharge Llne and Pump DIscharge Elbow Hydraullc Pump Case Drain Llne and Pump Case Drain Fitting Generator DC Output Cable Englne Control Rod and Fuel Control Lever Englne Electrlcal Cables and Receptacles Booster Coll Relay Box Assembly Water Injectlon Tank Fillerneck

14.) 15.) 16.) 17.) 18.)

Englne Connector Box Electrlcal Ass. Starter Cables and Starter Generator Cut-Out Box Electrlcal Ass. AC Generator Cut-Out Box Cable Water Injectlon Shut-Off Valve and Air Llne to Englne 19.) Cabln Pressurlzatlon System Ducts 20.) Water Injectlon System Fluid Llne and Englne Inlet Connectlon 21.) Hydraullc Reservoir Outlet Connectlon and Supply Llne to Englne Pump 22.) Fuel Supply Llnes 23.) Fuel System Main Shut-Off Valve Installation 24.) Hydraullc Seepage Pump Drain Lines 25.) Engine Oil Sump Overboard Drain Elbow and Llne 26.) Tip Tank Fuel System Selector Valve 27.) Lower Englne Mount Rod and Bottom Englne Suspension Bracket 28.) Combustlon Chamber Drain Llnes and Fittings

68

29.) 30.) 31.) 32.) 33.) 34.) 35.) 36.) 37.) 38.) 39.) 40.) 41.) 42.) 43.) 44.) 45.) 46.)

Engine - Driven Hydraulic Pump Radio Noise Filter Capacitor Assembly Oll Sump Fillerneck Assembly Ignltion Exciter Unit Igniter Plug Flexible Tallplpe Assembly Coollng Air Outlet Connection Clamp Engine Suspension Trunnion Compositor Fuel Pressure Warnlng Switches Installation Fuel Shut-Off Actuating Mechanism Installation Water Injectlon System Pressure Regulating Valve Engine - Driven Fuel Boost Pump Fuel and Oil Pressure Transmitter Installation Generator Fuel Pressure Warning Switch Inst. Tachometer Generator Top and Bottom Fuel Pumps

F9F-6/8 PRATT AND WHITNEY J48-P-8 ENGINE

COUGAR ENGINE AIR SYSTEM

1. Auxiliary Air Intake Doors 2. Plenum Chamber (Fuselage Sta 258 to 322) 3. Air Inlet Slots (In tail section skin) 4. Tail Pipe Shroud 5. Tail Pipe 6. Shroud Fire Screen Cooling Air Inlets 7. Screened Engine Air Inlets 8. Air· Duct Openings (In wiIig stub leading edges)

69

J48-P-8

TAILHOOK AND TAIL SKID DEPLOYED

ENGINE

FUSELAGE TAIL SECTION 1. 2. 3. 4.. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.

Forward Blow-in Door Radio Antenna Coaxial Cable Tail Section Attachment Stud Hole for Elevator Down Cable (Yellow Dot) Hole lor Elevator Up Cable (Red Dot) Tail Seetion AIt.chment Stud Hole Gulde Pln Hole (12) Hole lor Rudder Cable (Black Dot) Water Jnjection Fluid Line Rudder Cable (Black Band) Elevator Up Cable (Red Band) Elevator Down Cable (Yellow Band) Radio Antenna Coaxial Cable Receptacle Alt Blow-In Door Electrical DiscOMect Plug Rudder Tab Square Drive Tube

REMOVAL

17 . T aU Removal Access Plate 18. Arresting Hook Raising Cylinder Hydraulic Line 19. Air Speed StaUe Vent Line 20. Arresting Hook Contral Cable 21. Toll Section Installation Guide Pln (12) 22. 'Hole for Arresting Hook Contral Cable 23. Engine Mount Fitting 24 . Rudder Tab Square Drive Tube Attachment

25. Compressor Air Bleed Line 26. Combustion Chamber Drain Fitting (F9F-5 Airplanes Only) 27. GT-513 Tail Seetion Holsting Sling 28. GT-508 Internal Wrenching Hex Socket Wrench

17

70

1. Cables and accompanying holes in bulkhead are color coded as folIows: Red - Elevator Up Cables Yellow- Elevator Down Cables Black - Rudder Cables 2. Landing gear struts must be fully exte nded before removing taU section in order to set c radle under tail sectio n. 3. Before installing tai! seetion, see Caution , paragraph 2- 314

NOSE GEAR

71

COUGAR

MAIN

GEAR

See Detail "C"

21

Line Parallel With

~~~~~L-~~~~~. G'OO"~L~ Detail

Detail ''B n

72

"c"

COUGAR

COUGAR

MAIN

GEAR

TAIL

SKID Above, Cougar main gear and door. (Ginter) At lett, Cougar tail skid extended. (Ginter) Below, Grumman tail skid illustration.

73

»

FORWARD

FUSELAGE SPEED

BRAKES

At lett, fully-extended speed brakes and above partially extended speed brakes. Interior of the speed brakes were red. (Ginter) Below, speed brake weil interior with speed brakes and actuators fully open. (National Archives)

74

BLUE ANGELS

FLiGHT DEMONSTRATION TEAM The Blue Angel's origins can be traced to NAATC Jacksonville, FL, in 1946. The original team , led by LCDR Roy M. "Butch" Voris, was comprised of four instructors from the training command flying F6Fs in their spare time . The original intent was to show student pilots precision flying as it should be done. In a very short time, they were performing at Naval Air Stations and civilian air shows . They traded in their Hellcats for F8F Bearcats in August and put on a spectacular performance at the 1946 Cleveland Air Races . They flew the nimble Bearcat until July 1949, when they picked up the Grumman F9F-2 Panther. During July, while working up on the Panther, the unit continued putting on airshows in the Bearcats. The first public airshow flown in the new F9F-2 Panthers was on 20 August 1949 at Beaumont, TX. The _ team leader at the time was LCDR "Dusty" Rhodes. Other team members included LT Jake Robcke , LT R. L. Longworth , LTJG E. R. Roth , LT G. W. Hoskins, LTHai Heagerty, LT Ed Mahood, and LT Ed Oliphant.

Above, LCDR Hawkins was in command of the Blue Angels in August 1953 when he became the first Navy pilot to inject through a canopy. (USN) Below, artists rendering of the inverted near supersonic ejection. To make maUers more dicey, he ejected between 30,000-to-40,000 feet. (USN)

For the 1950 show season , the team consisted LCDR John J. Magda, six pilots and two dozen maintenance personnel. The pilots were LT A. R. Hawkins, LT Jake H. Robcke , LT Ralph Hanks , LT JG George W. Hoskins, LTJG E. F. Roth, and LTJG F. J. Murphy.

COUGARS

commenced , it was decided that the "Blues" would be disbanded and impressed into service with the fleet. The pilots supplied the nucleus of VF191. While in Korea, John Magda was killed while on a missiQn near Wonsan in March 1951 . Leiter that year, the Navy reactivated the team. They put Butch Voris back in charge of the team again . Besides Butch , the new team consisted of LCDR Ray Hawkins, LT Pat Murphy, LT T. R. "Tom" Jones, l TJG Bud Rich, LTJG D. E. "Bud" Wood, LT Harding C. "Mac" MacKnight as engineering officer and Frank Graham as the public information officer. The new Blues picked up higher performance F9F-5s and for a short period , two F7U-1 Cutlasses. MacKnight would fly one Cutlass and the team brought in LCDR Edward L. "Whitey" Freightner as the second F7U-1 pilot. Whitey had been flying the aircraft as a test pilot at the Naval Air Test Center. After flying with the Blue Angels prior to the Korean War, LCDR Arthur B. Hawkins took command from LCDR Roy M. "Butch" Voris for the 1953 show season. The other pilots were Rich, Aslund, Jones, and Murphy. The publicity member of the team was LCDR Frank Graham . During the 1953 season , Hawkins developed the Blue Angels' trademark maneuver, the fleur-de-lis .

Shortly after the Korean War In early August 1953, wh ile still flying a show schedule, the team traveled to Grumman and picked-up six new F9F-6 Cougars (BuNos 128080, 116, 128-129, 152, and 446) that they planned to use for the 1954 show season. During the ferry fl ight back to Corpus Christi , Ray Hawkins performed a Blue Angels and Navy first when he beat all Navi altitude and speed records for a high-speed ejection. He also became the first pilot to eject through a closed canopy. The cause of the accident was a stabilizer trim runaway. This was not the first incident with a runaway stabilizer and the F9F-6 fleet was grounded. The

75

At lett, LCDR Zeke Cormier took over as CO for the 1955 air show season and introduced the Grumman F9F-8 Cougar to the nation. (USN)

Blues' remaining five aircratt sat on the ramp at Corpus Christi for several weeks until they were returned to Grumman , where a fix was applied and the aircratt were reassigned to the fleet. LCDR Hawkins' ejection was accomplished during a 35° inverted, nearly supersonic dive. Because of this, he could not reach the pre-ejection lever. He then reached to the side of the headrest and pulled the manual release safety pin from the catapult so the seat could be fired without jettisoning the canopy. This feature saved his life and was new to the F9F-6. BuAer issued a service bulletin calling for the installation of this system to all existing ejection seats where possible. For the 1954 show season, the team members were: LTJG Frank N. Jones (solo), LT JG Daryl Crow (spare), LTJG Aslund (Iett wing), LTJG Kenneth Wall ace (slot), Capt. C. O. Hiett, USMC, LCDR Dick Newhafer. In February, CDR Zeke Cormier took over command of the Blues and led through their transition to the F9F-8 Cougar for the 1955 show season. The squadron trained in the Cougars at EI Centro and conducted a pre-season show at both NAF EI Centro and NAS Miramar on 22 and 28 January respectively. The official unveiling of the Cougar with the unit was at Corpus Christi on 4 February 1955. Two of the biggest shows for the 1955 show season were the National Aircratt Show at Oklahoma City on 26-28 April and during the Boy Scout Jamboree at Salt Lake City on 19-22 May. By the end of the show

At lett, the 1955 Blue Angel team lettto-right: Capt. Pete Olsen, USMC, LT JG Ed McKeller, LT JG Bill Gureck, LT JG Ken Wallace, LCDR Zeke Cormier, and LT Nello Pierozzi. (USN)

76

season, the team had flown 49 performances in their new Cougars and moved their home base from Corpus Christi to NAS Pensacola. The roster for the 1955 season was LCDR Zeke Cormier #1, LTJG Bill Gureck #2, LT Nello Pierozzi #3, LTJG Ken Wallace #4, LTJG Ed McKeller #5, and Capt. Pete Olson #6-soI0. For the 1956 show season roster, Ken Wallace and Pete Olson were replaced with Capt. Chuck Holloway, LT Lefty Schwartz, and LT Bruce Bagwell. The 1956 show season was kicked-off on 31 January at Miami, FL, and their first foreign performance occurred over Toronto, Canada, on 5 September. The final show was at Hutehinson, KS , on 10 October and in December 1956, LCDR Ed Holly relieved LCDR Cormier of command . Winter training was conducted ~t NAAS EI Centro, and a kick-off airshow was performed on 31 January 1957. Eighteen airshows were per-

formed by mid-year when the scheduled transition to the Grumman F11 F Tiger commenced . The Tigers were picked-up from Grumman on 10 April and ferried back to Pensacola. After three months of training between airshows in the Cougars, the first Tiger airshow was performed on 4 July at Newcastle AFB. A final Cougar performance was accomplished on 12 July at Sherman Field , Pensacola. The team received the two-seat F9F8TfTF-9J (BuNos 142470, 147404) in1957 and flew it until 1968. The aircraft usually wore number 7 on the tail but also sported 0 in 1958.

77

The 1957 team consisted of: LCDR Ed Holly, LT Bob Rasmussen , LT Herb Hunter, LT Nello Pierozzi, LT Lefty Swartz, 1stLt. Tom Jefferson, LT Bruce Bagwell , and LCDR Bill OIeson. The F9F-8 Cougars assigned to the Blues were: 131099, 142-143, 147, 205 , 208, 210-213, and 138870.

Above, Ken Wallace in the slot behind Zeke Cormier in 1955. (USN) Below, testing the wing folds during maintenance on a Blue Angel Cougar in 1956. (National Archives)

78

___ 7

/"" ------_.-

,. ~--

At left: top-to-bottom. Blue Angels number one F9F-8 BuNo 131205 at NAS Los Alamitos, CA, on 12 May 1956. (William Swisher) Blue Angels number two F9F-8 BuNo 131208 at NAS Los Alamitos, CA, on 12 May 1956. (William Swisher) Blue Angels number five F9F-8 BuNo 144279 at NAS Oakland, CA, on 12 September 1956. This was the only Cougar delivered to the Blue Angels that retained a refueling probe provision and which had intake splitter plates. (Peter M. Bowers) Blue Angels number six F9F-8 BuNo 138870 at the Detroit airport on 1 July 1955. (Brian Baker via William Swisher) The aircraft were painted Blue Angel Blue with chrome yellow markings and polished metal leading edges. Above, Blue Angels one through six at NAS Oakland, CA, in 1956. (Peter M. Bowers) Below, Blue Angel Cougars numbers one through four over the Seattle area in 1956. Note that aircraft number three does not have the Blue Angels insignia on its nose in front of the U. S. Navy and that the area over the intake between the wings and fuselage are polished metal. (Gordon S. Williams)

79

Above, Blue Angels F9F-8T BuNo 142470 at NAS Oakland, CA, on 1 September 1958. Instead of number seven, the aircraft carried a zero on the tail during 1958. In the background is the first R50 assigned to the squadron; it remained in standard Navy transport scheme until it was replaced . (William T. Larkins) Below, F9F-8T BuNo 142470 with smoke on over NAS Pensacola, FL, in 1959. (USN)

80

Above, Blue Angels 7 TF-9J BuNo 142470 on 30 October 1965 with LCDR Bob Cowles' name painted under the canopy rail. In the background is the second R5D/C-54 assigned to the unit, BuNo 50868. (William T. Larkins) Below, tight overlap of the Cougar formation. (USN)

81

82

83

FISHER MODELS RESIN

1/32 SCALE

F9F-8 COUGAR

KIT

This large, expensive resin kit has two major parts, the hollow cast fuselage and one-piece wing . The kit includes resin and photo-etched detail parts, vacuformed canopy, decal sheet and a twelve-page illustrated construction manual. The kit provides drop tanks, pylons, bombs and Sidewinders, too. Parts are also provided for building the kit with the forward fuselage speed brakes open and the kit's control surfaces can also be posed. Part count for the model is 142 resin pieces, 58 photo-etched pieces, and the vacuformed canopy.

COlLlECT - AIRE RESIN 1/48 SCALE F9F-8/8P

The kit can be purchased direct fram the manufacturer, Fisher Model & Pattern, 5290 Buckboard Lane, Paradise, CA 95969. Fisher Models has plans to issue a follow-up kit of the F9F-8T/TF-9J in late 2005. They also produce a Grumman Panther resin kit in 1/32 scale.

COLLECT AIR MODELS:

The Collect Aire 1/48 scale resin F9F-8/8P kit is one of their finest offerings when finished. The kit comes with lots of resin detail parts as weil as some metal parts too. Also included are poseable speed brakes, and flaps as weil as optional drop tanks. Decals included are those for a VT-26 F9F-8, a VFP-61 F9F-8P and a Blue Angels F9F-8. The company also produces a 1/48 scale resin kit of the F9F-8T/TF9J two-seat trainer version of the Cougar. This version will be reviewed in the future book on that version to be released later in 2005. The kit can be ordered from Collect-Aire Models, 166 Granville Lane, North Andover, MA, 01845 . Phone: (978) 688-7283 Fax: (978) 685-0220

84

[

COMET, AURORA, ADDAR 1/80 SCALE F9F-6 COUGAR

The 1957 Aurora release at right followed the kit's release by Comet. It contained ten pieces and was molded in light grey plastic. A two-part display stand was included, but no pilot figure was included . The outline is reasonably accurate as are the scribed panel lines. The review kit was built in the early '60s without any modifications. Due to the terrible decals of the period, and the fact that decal placement was scribed into the plastic with raised borders, the kit's markings were hand-painted and have thus stood the test of time. The kit was re-issued in 1976 in a 2-for-1 box which included a Republic F-84 Thunderstreak kit. In this reincarnation, the landing gear was deleted, wing fences, were provided and a pilot's head was added to the fuselage. The model was molded in an attractive translucent dark Navy blue plastic. The F-84 kit was molded in silver. 80th models included a twopiece display stand.

85

KIT

REVELL

1/52 SCALE

The Revell F9F-8 Cougar kit first appeared in the late 1950s and has been re-issued numerous times using different box art. The box art at right was used in the 1960s and was reused under license to Lodela in Mexico in the 1970s. The box art depicts aircraft assigned to Navy and Marine Reserve units at NAS Willow Grove, PA, in the '60s. Unlike some of Revell's early kits , the aircraft's outline is fairly accurate. The model represented an early production F9F-8 Cougar without intake splitter plates and refueling probe. Call me crazy, but my favorite feature of these early Revell kits was the molded-in-place pilot figure and cockpit detail. The model's biggest shortcomings were the rather crude landing gear and the incorrectly-shaped forward nose section . This review example was built in the 1960s. Revell re-worked the model and re-released it in 1985 and 1993 in the box art shown at right. The kit was relabeled as 1/48 scale to enhance sales and was packaged in an oversize box. Revell added two wing pylons with two Sidewinder missiles and decals for a China Lake test aircraft. A nose probe and intake splitter plates were also added along with decals for an F9F-8B from VMA-311 .

86

F9F-8

COUGAR

KIT

HASEGAWA I MINICRAFT 1/72 SCALE In the early 1970s, Hasegawa released a 1/72 scale Grumman F9F8 Cougar kit for wh ich the VT -26 box art is depicted at right, and was reissued in 2004. The '70s kit included decals for VT-26 (BuNo 138891), VF81 (BuNo 141036) and those for Blue Angels number one. The model was re-packaged in the United States and distributed by MinicraftiHasegawa as kit number 1139. The review models were built in the early '70s using the kit's decals. The model included a two-piece posable canopy with pilot, posable speed brakes, and posable tailhook. Armament consisted of two wing tanks and four Sidewinder missiles. A choice of nosecones with or without refueling probe was also included. The model has been re-issued numerous times over the years with the 1992 VF-43 (BuNo 144281) box art shown at right. This offering also included decals for a Navy blue VF61 Cougar (BuNo 141092) coded E/OO. Another blue Cougar, this time from VF-113 (BuNo 138893), was offered in 2000 as seen in the box art below right. The decal sheet also provided enough numbers so that any aircraft assigned to VF-113 could be depicted.

87

F9F-8 COUGAR

KIT

HASEGAWA I MINICRAFT 1n2 SCALE

88

F9F-8

COUGAR

KIT

[

1/200 SCALE

GRUMMAN

F9F-6/8 COUGAR

MODELS

By Tom Healy In the mid-1950s, the Hawk company produced aseries of 1/200 scale injection molded plastic jet fighter models, which were used as breakfast cereal prizes. At least that is how I remember obtaining my copies. The series included the F-84E, YF-84F, XF92A, F4D-1, F7U-3 and the F9F-6. In the mid-1990s, HBM produced cast resin models of most of these to replace the extremely rare Hawk models. The HBM F9F-8 Cougar is no. 287 in their line of about seven hundred 1/200 scale models. It is an improved rede of the earlier model adding such details as wing fences, saw-tooth leading edge and UHF nose antenna bulge. It is a single piece casting, with a 2.07 inch wing span. I finished the HBM model as a USMC F9F-8B from VMA-311 from EI Toro, CA, in 1958. The in-flight refueling probe was added from brass wire. My Hawk Cougars represent an all-blue F9F-6 from · VF-24 in 1954, a VCP-63 F9F-8P in 1958, a TF-9J (F9F-8T) from VA-127 at Air Group Twelve in 1964. The VF-24 model is a stock Hawk molding, and the other two have their nose/cockpits modified by being built-up with wood filler, which was all that was available to me forty years ago.

AIRMODEL 1n2 SCALE VACUFORM F9F-8/8P/8T KIT

Insignia decals are from HBM, but the rest of the markings are taken from my spares box or hand painted. Contact HBM Models, Professor Ron Crawford, Post Office Box 23, North Ferrisburgh, VT, 05473, for information about obtaining this or any other 1/200 scale models. The 1970's Airmodel vacuform Cougar kit included parts for the F9F-8P photo-recon and F9F-8T two-seat trainer version. As with most Airmodel kits, if there is another choice, take it!

89

rr