Douglas BTD Destroyer - Development

Development

On 20 June 1941, the United States Navy placed an order with the Douglas Aircraft Company for two prototypes of a new two seat dive bomber to replace both the Douglas SBD Dauntless and the new Curtiss SB2C Helldiver, designated XSB2D-1. The resulting aircraft, designed by a team led by Ed Heinemann, was a large single-engined mid-winged monoplane. It had a laminar flow gull-wing, and unusually for a carrier based aircraft of the time, a tricycle undercarriage. It was fitted with a bomb bay and underwing racks for up to 4,200 lb (1,900 kg), while defensive armament consisted of two wing mounted 20 mm (0.79 in) cannon and two remote controlled turrets, each with two .50 in (12.7 mm) machine guns.

The prototype first flew on 8 April 1943, demonstrating excellent performance, being much faster and carrying nearly double the bombload of the Helldiver, and orders for 358 SB2D-1s quickly followed. The U.S. Navy changed its requirements, however, wanting single seat carrier based torpedo/dive bombers without defensive turrets, and Douglas re-worked the SB2D by removing the turrets and second crewman, while adding more fuel and armor, producing the BTD-1 Destroyer. The orders for SB2Ds were converted to BTD-1s, with the first BTD flying on 5 March 1944.

Read more about this topic:  Douglas BTD Destroyer

Famous quotes containing the word development:

    The experience of a sense of guilt for wrong-doing is necessary for the development of self-control. The guilt feelings will later serve as a warning signal which the child can produce himself when an impulse to repeat the naughty act comes over him. When the child can produce his on warning signals, independent of the actual presence of the adult, he is on the way to developing a conscience.
    Selma H. Fraiberg (20th century)

    I’ve always been impressed by the different paths babies take in their physical development on the way to walking. It’s rare to see a behavior that starts out with such wide natural variation, yet becomes so uniform after only a few months.
    Lawrence Kutner (20th century)

    Somehow we have been taught to believe that the experiences of girls and women are not important in the study and understanding of human behavior. If we know men, then we know all of humankind. These prevalent cultural attitudes totally deny the uniqueness of the female experience, limiting the development of girls and women and depriving a needy world of the gifts, talents, and resources our daughters have to offer.
    Jeanne Elium (20th century)