HOME | DD
DouglasCastleman β Fantasy Formation: Grumman Cats
#airplanes #aviation #aviationart #aviators #fighters #flying #grumman #jetaircraft #jets #navy #pilots #navalaviation
Published: 2017-10-11 16:09:14 +0000 UTC; Views: 3901; Favourites: 182; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
24" x 48" oil on canvas painting of the "Cats" that Grumman designed during the 20th Century. From Β upper left: the Wildcat, Hellcat, Tigercat, Bearcat, Panther, Cougar, Tiger, and the Tomcat.Related content
Comments: 50
π: 0 β©: 0
Really love the Tomcat in this one, a great rendering all around!
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you, John.
π: 0 β©: 0
This is really beautiful! 
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks...not so hard getting detail when the painting is large like this one...and I definitely went for vibrancy here (sometimes I think I should have toned it down a bit), so thank you for your comment.
π: 0 β©: 1
You're very welcome! I think you got it just right with the vibrancy here; one can almost hear the thunder of the engines, and the aircraft really look as if they're about to fly right at one.
π: 1 β©: 0
I really appreciate that, Β Lady-Pilot!
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you very much.
π: 0 β©: 0
I have always loved the Tigercat and Bearcat
π: 0 β©: 1
Hard to argue with that!Β
π: 0 β©: 0
It's hard to believe that a) Grumman didn't design any fighters between the Tiger and the Tomcat and b) that Grumman had to sell out to Northrop.Β If I had been a betting man, I would have bet that it would have been the other way around.Β You know, Grumman had an impressive string of selling fighters to the Navy between the F6F and the F9F-6/8.Β The XF10F would have been an interesting a/c to have seen flying.Β I believe it was the first swing wing fighter designed for the US military.
π: 0 β©: 1
I agree...but the fighters for the Navy started long before the F6F...F3F and F4F Wildcat comes to mind, the latter featured in the painting here, as it was the first of the "Cats." You are right about the XF10F Jaguar, it was designed as the first PRODUCTION swing wing plane, but had countless problems, and was rightly canceled after the test phase.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh, I wasn't implying that Grumman started with the F6F, I meant that from the F6F until the F9F, they had an unbroken string of purchases by the USN.Β The XF5F and the XF10F weren't bought the the Navy.Β I used to own a book called "The American Fighter" and in it was a sketch of the XF10F and it was one UGLY a/c.Β It just looked too big and cumbersome to be a decent jet fighter, especially for the Navy.Β BTW, besides Grumman, do you know the only other a/c designer that designed and/or built 10+ fighters for the Navy?Β (You probably do but I bet most people don't and they'd be surprised when they find out.)
π: 0 β©: 1
I see what you mean about the unbroken string of purchases now...I had almost forgot about the failed XF5F! (I think that was a twin-engine bird, right?) I have a great book on the Grumman planes, and it has a chapter on each...the XF10F-1 was truly ugly, and the adage that says "if it doesn't look right, it won't fly right" really applies there. I am guessing McDonnell Aircraft is the designer you are looking for here? I can't think of any other, Β at least.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Yup.Β The XF5F was a twin engine fighter design.Β However, the nose only went as far as the middle of the wing and the engines slightly outboard of where the fuselage would have been had the nose extended the normal length.Β en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_β¦ Odd looking to say the least.Β Grumman actually altered that design slightly in an attempt to sell it the the USAAF as the XP-50, a more conventional looking twin engine fighter.Β en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_β¦
Actually, the other a/c manufacturer to design 10+ fighters for the Navy was Curtiss.Β Their last design for the Navy was the XF15C, a mixed propulsion a/c like the Ryan FR Fireball.Β The McDonnell-Douglas has designed only 5 fighters for the Navy, the FD/H, F2D/H, F3H, F4H (F-4) and the F-18.Β (For anyone who reads this and wants to argue this remember these are Navy fighters only.Β The F-15 was designed from the start to be a USAF fighter.)
π: 0 β©: 1
That is so unexpected about the answer being Curtiss...I really didn't know that. I know that the SB2C Helldiver was so poorly manufactured that it pretty much killed their chances for a postwar airplane contract, although they tried anyway with some designs, like that XF15C you mentioned. Thanks!
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah.Β As strange as it may sound, Curtiss built one of, if not the, first carrier based a/c for the Navy WAY back in the 1920s.Β They didn't sell a lot of fighters to the Navy after the mid-1930s but they designed 15.Β They better known for the fighters they designed for the USAAC/USAAF, known as the Hawk series.Β The last fighter they designed was the XP-87 Blackhawk which looked suspiciously like the North American B-45 down to the four jet engines housed in wing nacelles, only smaller.
π: 0 β©: 0
Why the shift from blue to greyish white and now just grey? I think there was a reason the navy changed the colors but I can't recall it.
π: 0 β©: 1
Ideas for camouflage and paint schemes seems to constantly change. Even the F-14 shown here is the way it was in the 1970's with still the high visibility markings, which they certainly don't use anymore. When they retired, they all had the low-vis markings on an overall grey paint scheme, which appears (no pun intended) to be the best camouflage ever...with distance, the aircraft just disappears into the sky. Of course, as an artist, I prefer the high-vis stuff, to give me something interesting to paint.
π: 0 β©: 1
Well grey isn't the most visable of colors. Which is why they choose it.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yep, it sure is...everything leans toward gray with distance (atmospheric perspective)...at least here on earth...space paintings that employ that standard technique bug me.
π: 0 β©: 0
This is the best formation ever.
I don't know wich one I'd choose. Maybe the F9F panther.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank, MisterLuK.Β
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you, as always, Karin.
π: 0 β©: 1
You're very welcome
π: 0 β©: 0
Grumman Girls!Β That what we in the Navy say.Β They are all beautiful too.Β My favorite one is the F-14.Β I've seen her fly and had to smell her jet exhaust on many an occasion.
I also submitted this to Tomcatsquadron, a group for premium F-14 art.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you! I agree with you about the beauty of these airplanes, and just about everybody these days has the F-14 as their favorite, and rightly so, but I love the look of the small Tiger, and I got to see them fly once as a kid when the Blue Angels still used the by then outdated fighters. It was actually my very first airshow, and I was about eight or nine, but I remember it well still. As far as success though, it is hard to argue against the Hellcat...as it produced more American aces than any other plane, period.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks, and it was!
π: 0 β©: 0
thank GOD you didn't put a Buffalo in.... Β
π: 0 β©: 1
That was made by Brewster, as I am pretty sure you know, but thought I'd put that fact here for others who may not. Strange how the Finns had tremendous success with the export version of that plane, as bad as it was.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yes I know it wasn't a Grumman bird even though it beat out the F4F with the navy ( dunno HOW... but times were different then)
I am glad to see you put a Tiger ( and Tigercat) in the formation since thats about the least knows "cat" Grumman ever built.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yes, and I love the look of both of those little remembered airplanes...there was also the Jaguar, but that didn't make it to production (rightly so), so I left it out of this piece.
π: 0 β©: 1
If I remember right that was the... F-10 and had a very early sorta swing wing they later copied for the Tom & the 'vark.( altho Grumman didnt make the Aardvark that was Gen Dy) But yeah it never got past test phase and really was an ugly bird even for a jet ( and I say that knowing the ugliest jet ever was the -10 Thunderbolt II.. but I love them so!)
π: 0 β©: 1
You remember correctly...the XF10F-1 Jaguar...and you are also right it is among the ugliest of airplanes ever. The designer, Gordon Israel, had success with others though...including the Tigercat, Bearcat, and Panther...and the Learstar jet, for Lear. (This part I had to look up, lol.)
π: 0 β©: 1
Well I forgot the X n last F part.. It's been a while since I was perusing my old aircraft stuff and well I AM old too.
Just did a quick search and it sorta reminds me of a bell X-1 that someone tried to make into a fighter. Just fat and ugly really... and to counterpoint that there is the Me 163 which was also fat and ugly but pretty in a way too. ( and yes I know the -163 wasnt more than a scoot n shoot and hope to land kind of fighter, but still)
I LIKE the Tigercat best ( altho have seen way too many who love the Bearcat at Reno Air races) since it reminds me of a sleek and standard tailed P-38 or P-61 ( Or it could also be just a B-26 on slimfast/weightwatchers) and it's too bad it missed WW2 ( mostly ) and by Korea everything was going jet so....
The F9F was a good first rounder.. but again not one of my favs either since it WAS a first timer even though it looked good and performed pretty well ( The Angels used it if I recall right. and then they switched engines and swapped wings to make the F9 Cougar
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you, David. This would be a huge problem to photograph, don't you think? So a painting was in order.
π: 0 β©: 1
to be sure!..
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you...I did three of these larger "Fantasy Formation" paintings...this one, First Generation USAF jet fighters, and one of my most popular prints, the "Century Series."
π: 0 β©: 0