I had the great honor of spending many hours in an Albatross as a spotter. I have flown in many aircraft, and the Albert always conveyed a sense of being rock solid and capable of handing anything. For search and rescue in the mountainous terrain of British Columbia, it went into tight spots and always came out a champ.
Great video! My dad was a radioman and gunner on the PBY(VP-53). He manned the tunnel gun (.30 cal) and used it to rake the deck of the German sub U-156 to keep the crew away from their guns and the sub was sunk. In his flight log he had one flight which lasted just over 18 hours! He would say to conserve fuel they would cut back on one engine and alternate engines every so often. Best regards, Jay
We in the Netherlands managed a Catalina PBY for many years, which was also used for sightseeing flights. I was there 4 times and you got a water landing twice per flight and an immediate restart... that was sometimes quite intense. Very unfortunate that our Cat had to make an emergency landing on his nose because the nose wheel did not come out, a few years ago they had to sell him to the Collins Foundation in the US... very sad because we miss him immensely... I am 73 years old and they were my 2 regular outings a year as a 73-year-old widower
An old friend of mine told me the story of how he was among a group of friends who would fly a PBY into the Gulf of Mexico, land on the water, and fish out of the gun blisters. This would have been immediately post-war.
The PBY was a more graceful and beautiful plane as well. Pilots agreed the PBY was difficult in learning to fly, but those difficulties once mastered enhanced its' flight characteristics. Nice video.
I was a passenger on an Albatross three times flying between Old Harbor and Kodiak, Alaska in the 1970's. It was the rough equivalent of a city bus up there. We flew around, not over, the mountains and took off and "landed" in the water. The memory lingers.
My best friends dad was a PBY pilot. He would share amazing stories of flying with me. He was like a second dad to me and I loved hearing his stories just before dinner time…I’d leave as soon as he was ready to eat and couldn’t wait for dinner time another day.
I have a friend who flew the Albatross in the USAF in North Africa back in the 1950's. He's 94 this year and it's great to hear him tell stories about working search and rescue in that era.
I had the privilege of refurbishing the G11 Albatross’s for Chalk’s airlines at Grummans St. Augustine, FL. In the 80’s. I was lucky enough to be one of the first people hired for that contract, when we got plane #1 almost finished they took us for a ride and a water landing at Crescent Lake outside of Satsuma, FL that was the smoothest landing I’ve ever had but the fisherman on the lake were pissed giving us the finger and shaking their fist at us. When we took off from the lake the prop wash from the propellers pushed out a bowl of water in the lake larger than a Volkswagen Beetle that was cool to see. I was a Navy veteran and went on the work on many different planes at several major Aerospace Companies. Also the vortex out in front of a jet engine when water was on the tarmac was neat to see watching it travel around in front of the intake. Thanks for the video brought back an old man some favorable memories.
The Albatross did have an antisubmarine warfare role - not with the U.S., but with Norway and several other NATO countries. In that role, it carried plotting/tracking equipment, sonobuoys, MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Detection) gear, and homing torpedoes or depth charges. The cruise speed for the SA/HU-16 is understated - the manual gives it a cruise speed in the clean condition of 134 KTAS (Knots True AirSpeed), or about 157 statue MPH. The biggest difference, though, is that the Catalina wasn't designed to be able to land on the open sea - they were based out of sheltered harbors and atolls, and could be easily damaged in an open sea landing, often sinking the airplane. The Albatross is certificated for Class 6 seas - 10 foot/3m swells, 7 ft/2m waves. They could also be fitted with a reinforcing skid on the hill bottom, and outrigger skis on the wing floats to allow them to land and take off from snow and ice. The USAF also used SA-16s for Special Operations - covert insertion and extraction of agents or downed aircrew behind the Iron Curtain in the 1950s - although, with that pair of 9 cylinder Wright Cyclones clattering away, one has to wonder how covert that was - you could hear one coming for miles/minutes.
Thanks for that, I was scratching my head at the stated cruise speed given here. For take off on open water the HU-16 required JATO packs in most seas, which for some unknown reason (🤭) were never certified for civilian use. I had thought (dunno if assumption or badly informed) that the Cat was fine for open water landing given it’s SAR role.
In the mid 70s to the early 80s I use to fly part time, the Albatross’s little brother, the Goose. We use to bring crew members for the off shore drilling rigs off the Gulf coast of Louisiana.
not going to lie, felt like reading wikipedia article on the two planes. Maybe have a tour of the interiors? show a floor plan? talk about features, dig up some stories of things the crews liked and disliked about them in action?
Things I've read: there was a window on the PBY near the propellers. During flight, one crewman stuck his hand out and was injured. While receiving first aid, he was asked what happened. He stuck his other hand out and demonstrated.... I heard they kept lots of pencils on a PBY. These were used to jamb into bullet holes to keep the water out (must have been small caliber). I suspect these were just tall tales.
FYI, Regarding the PBY. We Canucks flew much the same plane on the North Atlantic and North Pacific during WWII. It was on the North Atlantic where they really earned their reputation, chasing subs and surface ships. We called our models Cansos after the Straight of Canso north of Newfoundland and the entrance to the St. Lawrence River. After the war, surplus aircraft were put to work on mining exploration, forest fire-fighting and passenger flights for transportation, logging and fishing companies all over Canada. Unfortunately, as a result of constant exposure to salt water, corrosion finally put an end to its amazing contribution to the war effort and then the expansion of Canadian enterprise. There is at least one in pristine condition flying around as a member of a historic group. As for the Albatross. Canada chose and flew the aircraft in the RCAF right up into the late 60s, and again surplus planes were put to work in the private and government work. All the Grumman flying boats have seen and continue to work in all types of work in Canada. We still have a good number of Grumman Goose that fly, mostly sport fishing groups or are in private hands. The Mallards were practically ripped out of our hands in order to start flying them in and around Florida. Most having been converted to turbine engines. The upside, I think, is there is enough money in that line of work to maintain them for a long, long time. I hope so. For many years, they flew passenger service out of Vancouver, BC, CYVR for West Coast Air Services. As a passenger my Father flew in them up and down our coast, visiting coastal communities as an Inspector with the provincial Fire Marshals Office. Later, after I graduated from high school, I fuelled them as an employee of the local Imperial Oil Company Aviation Division. Great aircraft.
Thank you for the comment. You make a good point in that many refer to these planes as PBY's, Catalina's, etc.... When in fact the early versions were known as "Nomads", the RCAF named their versions "Canso's". Quite a few were manufactured by Canadian Vickers with a PBV designation. Thanks for the comment and the history!
The ironic thing was that, when WWII broke out, the PBY was considered obsolete. The British Royal Navy and RAF were desperate for aircraft, and were happy to take any PBY planes that came their way. They were superb in the roll of ASW, being large enough to fit early detection gear.
In the mid nineties, while working in SJU, I was around a PBY-5 restoration, and was around an Albatross, a few Mallards, and Gooses, some still with radials, others modified with turboprops. Some still flew with Antilles Air boats. The original PBY was not amphibious as the landing gear was detached after entering the water. Amazing airplanes.
The PBY loses about 5 or 6 feet of span when she has the floats lowered. On one occasion an Albatross put down on the water in the arctic sircle and the props froze in reverse pitch and they had to taxi backwards into warmer air to get airborne again.
I remember seeing Catalinas still flying in the early 90s. There was one carrying a banner advertisement one summer at a beach near where I lived. Amazing bird considering its beauty and that it was only made until 1945.
I appreciate your informative video on the PBY, one of my favorites. Had to laugh at your comment that the PBY's crew could be anywhere between nine and ten crewmen. Where exactly is anywhere between nine and ten?
Wanted to see this comparison . You have enthusiasm. Have RC controlled Cat. and Grumpy. Same scale 6o odd inch. Look fwd. to next installation. Thanks all. Dave
I was the radio operator on the SA-16 Albatross at Goose Bay, Labrador. 54th Air Rescue Squadron. 1955 and 56. One full year. Best experience of a lifetime. Finest aircraft I served with. We flew when it was impossible for any other type of aircraft to get off the ground. Even when GCA COULD NOT LOCATE us.
I recall talking to folks who had flown the PBY, and they said it had to be constantly "flown", meaning constant physical control inputs to keep it in straight and level flight.
Decades ago I got typed in the Bird Innovator, Dr. Forrest Bird's four engine modified aircraft. He added two Lycoming IGSO 480's outboard of the Pratts for better on-water handling and a faster cruise speed. It was heavy, but fun! Landed it three times on the Catalina Island mountaintop strip giving underprivileged Long Beach kids rides over for buffalo burgers at the restaurant in Sunday afternoons. They, and we, loved it!
What's in a name? A lot ! "PBY stands for Patrol Bomber, and the Y stands for Consolidated. The original U.S. Navy designation for the Grumman Albatross was JR2F, JR stands for utility transport, the 2 means the second of this type from this manufacturer, and the F stands for Grumman. So, right from the U.S. Navy designations of the two planes the difference in their intended mission is obvious.
I went to northern New York State . A friend of mine purchased a single engine float plan with a 180 degree door to access men from. The plane was never used in the Second World War. The plane was in peace’s. We were going to take it a part and redo everything. He had an accident and broke his neck before he had everything in place. He was building a house and hanger at Massey air park. The airplane was moved to winter haven airport to work on and sale. He had faa approval to fly when working. He had panel layout for all new gauges ready. He had purchased a engine to replace its engine. Everything was coming together until the accident.
This one had a place for a medic and a person on a stretcher. It engine was a pusher three blade unit. A person had to climb into the nose had a hatch to anchor off shore. It had minor damage from limb hitting the wing in a storm in Canada.
My high school science teacher flew the PBY in WWll. His assessment was,”Nice enough handling aircraft but over reliant on the curvature of the earth to gain altitude.” It did indeed start life as a flyingboat and as with most in that era, if you wanted to move payload X over distance Y it will take power Z . With the technology available in the day that meant you needed long long runways that simply didn’t exist. Some would say the ocean was barely big enough,
I liked your presentation, but I’d like to make a minor correction and provide some additional info on the Albatross… Speed is wrong, the Albatross cruised at 140kt (30” 2000rpm). It still holds records for speed, range, altitude. The interior was huge compared to the Cat and the Albatross had a big hatch in the top of the fuselage. You could haul any part of the airplane except for the outer wing panels and the fuselage, so you could rescue another Albatross. There was a trifibian version that had ski attachments on the belly and float tanks. The Goat (Albatross) was very easy to fly but I cannot compare with the Cat being I don’t have time in one. The Albatross had 300 gallon drop tanks using standard bomb racks, so it is feasible to hang some bombs. The Albatross had Wright R-1820 single row 9 cylinder engines rated at 1425 hp for takeoff (51.5” 2700rpm) The Albatross was used by the Coast Guard, Air Force, Navy, CIA, and others.
And the Winner is ,,, the pbM, a very long career, sank subs and most importantly to a pilot it could land in much higher waves, I wish there was more out there on it. Very nice video thanks for taking the time to do this.
Not that I could ever afford one, but the Albatross has always been my favorite aircraft. Can't say why, but I've always been drawn to it. It was super cool to see one in person up at the air museum near March AFB.
More times than I could count I wished I could have been in the PBY Catalina Navy. But don't get me wrong. 1972-1976 US Navy, USS Ranger CV-61 was good duty.
The albatross was also used for infiltration and exfiltration. Some were fitted with the All-American System (Skyhook Extraction System) featured in the opening of the "Thunderball" Bond film.
I did not realize that the Albatross was in production until 1961. That was the same year I first saw an SA-16 up close, at Wheelus AFB in Libya. As I remember, there were couple of them stationed there for ASR duties. I once watched one take off from the water there, but they normally used the runway to come and go.
The range on these aircraft are astonishing. ... i think the design is fantastic and i cant see why nobody makes aircraft like that anymore. A few modern upgrades and they would still be viable.
Would you be able to compare the Catalina to the Kawanishi H8K? I was comparing different categories of WWII planes. Like if I was in charge of a major country in WWII and I had to pick one design for a class of aircraft which would I pick? For flying boat it seems the only plane that could compare to the Catalina is the Kawanishi H8K.
@@gj1234567899999 I was actually thinking about that very subject. I've been reading a lot of pacific submarine historical fiction, some by Craig DiLouie, and in almost every book there is a situation where US subs were attacked by a Kawanishi. I'll happily dig into this for you!
New subscriber and old pilot here. Excellent review and video. I got a chance to experience water takeoffs, flight and landings in the Albatross back in the 80's with Chalks from Miami to Nassau, Bahamas and back. Would you consider doing a review of the civilian conversions of the military Lockheed Ventures including the Learstar, Loadstar and especially the Howard 500 by Dee Howard. How about the civilian conversions of the A-26 by On Mark and others. They always impressed me when they were in use back in the 60's. Thanks
I'd be happy to investigate these civilian versions for you! I'll begin talking to some of my contacts with the Commemorative Air Force. There are a lot of experienced pilots that may have the answers you're looking for.
@@HistoryX Thanks for your attention and reply. The Howard 500 and A-26 On Mark conversions were favored by corporate executives back in the 50's and 60's when there were few to no business jets. The Lockheed Jetstar and later the Gulfstream II would out perform them but the first generations of smsller business jets came up short on any trips over 1000 nm. They could operate from short fields and their costs were a fraction of any alternatives.
While the PBY is definitely the more iconic and I guess sexier of the two the Albatross is far more comfortable and accommodating. Just ask Jimmy Buffet. Still, if you were going to make a flying RV wouldn't you really want to have those cool ass blisters?
I wish you would have started with range, speed, cruise, and Take off weight. And then compared durability and service requirements from histories in contemporary times.
I think theres a conversion that you can be done, where you replace the P&W 1830 engines on the PBY with a pair of Wright R-2600's, it's said to really wake the PBY up.
Thanks for this very interesting. My uncle was a navy pilot and he flew the Consolidated PB2Y Coronado near the end/after WW2. The Coronado was a four engine version. At first I thought he flew the Catalina but I have a picture of him and his crew in front of a Coronado. Perhaps he did time in both... I don't know. He did participate in the Bikini Island nuclear test. I assume ferrying parts, personnel, etc.. His aircraft in the picture had V6 stenciled on it which I assume stood for the VR-6 Navy Transport Squadron.
Great aircraft! There are rumors about a new future for a modernized version of the PBY Catalina for military service. Composite materials for the airframe, turboprop engines and modern electronics. Missions can incline SAR, ELINT, ASW, COD, as well as more convert missions, also drone control and resupply missions. Naturally the modernized version will be manufactured by a different company. So we will see what happens. It could be "pie in the sky." Yet there is no question that the Navy needs a new plane like these, for missions that helicopters are too slow, too short ranged for. Among the Pacific oceans many island chains.
Learn from history or repeat it. These types of Aircraft are not obsolete in today’s modern Navy Marines or Air Force or Coast Guard they can serve a essential role in both offense defense and search and rescue missions and coastal security.
They handle very different on the water. Albatross is more stable, but needs deeper water. Nose landing gear doors are designed differently. PBY doors can open and the nose will end up under the wing. Albatross forces them closed.
So the PBY Catalina was way more mission flexible, and war capable, especially with long range sub attack capability, than the rescue-only Albatross. The PBY was equally capable for search and rescue when flying without gunners like the Albatross. Both had near identical range, and cruising speeds. The only advantage is the 20% higher top speed of the Albatross. It makes one wonder if it was really worth the program cost to design and produce 466 Albatross's rather than to keep the existing post-war PBY inventory and continue low rate replacement PBY production. But I'm sure there must be more to this story that favors the Albatross.
I am sure the Albatorss could have been fitted with various weapon systems if there had been a need or if it had been available for service in WW2. Still surprising that the seem to have very close performance and specs considering how much newer the Albatross was.
After the war ended the US couldn't mothball and then scrap its armaments fast enough, especially ships and planes. I'm sure the surviving PBYs were included in those scrap piles. Secondly, the Catalina was a Navy plane and the Grumman had Air Force markings so it was built to a different set of specifications. Third, by the 1950's into the '60's the helicopter had supplanted the seaplane for search and rescue missions. On appearances and performance I would give the edge to the Catalina as well. What is not addressed here are the flying characteristics and reliability of the 2 planes: which was easier to handle in flight and which one required more maintenance to keep it flying. I think the determining factor lies in those answers.
If you consider when the PBY was designed and built in the 30's, it truly is a remarkable aircraft. Also, it's ability to be a multi-roll aircraft just adds to it's importance as a much needed asset during WWII. Other than maybe being "prettier" and having a slightly longer range, the Albatross is a little underwhelming considering it was built post WWII.
First time at your channel. Well done. Is the PBY that belongs to the Superior Chapter of the Commemorative Air Force (CAF) airworthy? If so, have they ever used it to assist Civil Air Patrol (CAP) with search and rescue, either over Lake Michigan / Lake Superior or the land? That would be a nice return to its patrol & rescue role.
How about take off performance comparisons? I've watched an Albatross come and go from Lake Union in Seattle and I've seen a PBY try to land. The PBY waved off due to low visibility.
The Albatross have flaps, reverse capability where as the Catalina does not. Catalina engines are 1200 hp compared to the Albatross at 1425 hp. The Catalina I used to work on and fly used to land on Lake Union in the late 80's prior to my friend owning it about 1990 to 1993 in northern California.
