Warbird Information Exchange

No. AFAIK, none of the work was done to airworthy standards. I was told that if they had wanted to make that SBD airworthy, they would have had to essentially build a new one from scratch.

As it is, the restoration used about 85% of the original material that was at the bottom of the lake. The aircraft carries it's original markings that it wore during Operation Torch. I'm not aware of any other surviving naval aircraft that were used during Torch, although I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong. IMO, the fact that most of the original material was used makes the restoration more significant because it truly represents the aircraft as it appeared during Torch. I don't think that level of originality could have been preserved with a flying example.

I'd like to see this Hellcat receive similar treatment. Use as much of the original material as possible, and make sure all the research is correct to restore it to as accurate as of a representation as possible.

There must have been a difference in corrosion treatment standards between Douglas and Grumman. I do know that the two Wildcats restored to flight which were former Lake Michigan recoveries kept a great deal of original structure and skin. One of them I remember reading had 85% original material... not sure of the other one. I do know that they anodized the skin on the Wildcat, which was a much better treatment than alodine. Maybe this was the difference... anyone know if Douglas used alodine or anodizing? I seem to remember the two Douglas SBD/A-24's I've worked on didn't have anodized skin, but my memory is hazy on that, as it was several years ago.

Cheers,
Richard

I do wish that the NMNA would take that area they have that is made to look like a hangar deck and put a few wildcats or hellcats in there with the wings folded to show people what it would have looked like in a carrier. It would make a very educational display.